Should You Rat On Yourself?

This video features Virginia Duncan, the lead plaintiff in the "Duncan v. Bonta" case challenging California's "large-capacity" magazine ban, discussing the ongoing legal battle. Duncan shares her personal journey from growing up with firearms due to her law-enforcement father to becoming a volunteer for CRPA and ultimately a plaintiff in a major Second Amendment case. She highlights the importance of standard-capacity magazines, particularly for women and families, and discusses the emotional and legal rollercoaster of the case, which has reached the U.S. Supreme Court. The video emphasizes the human element behind "Duncan v. Bonta" and encourages viewers to support CRPA's legal efforts and continue advocating for gun rights.

This CRPA TV episode, featuring Chuck Michel, discusses the significant legal developments in the Duncan v. Bonta case concerning California's magazine capacity ban. A recent DC court ruling has created a circuit split, potentially increasing the Supreme Court's likelihood of hearing the Duncan case. The discussion highlights the legal reasoning behind the DC ruling, emphasizing that standard-capacity magazines are considered 'arms' for lawful use.

This video addresses recent news regarding potential Glock bans in California and explores alternative firearm options for residents. It focuses on providing information about available choices for firearm owners facing new regulations in the state. The content appears to be geared towards educating consumers about their rights and options within the current legal landscape.

This video features Dan Dement from Franklin Armory discussing how the company navigates California's restrictive gun laws through innovation. It covers the origins of Franklin Armory in California, the history of the bullet button and Binary Firing System, and the introduction of their new Prevail bolt-action rifle with Total Round Control. The discussion also touches on California roster pistols like the CA7 and CA11, the impact of AB 1263 on parts shipping, and why Franklin Armory remains committed to operating in California.

This video critically examines California's nationwide enforcement of its gun laws, particularly targeting the distribution of digital files for 3D-printed firearms. The host, identified as an authority on Second Amendment advocacy, argues that these actions infringe upon First Amendment rights concerning digital speech and the Second Amendment's right to bear arms. The analysis highlights the legal battle against Gatalog Foundation Inc. and CTRL Pew LLC, emphasizing the constitutional implications of banning code that could be used to manufacture firearms.

This video analyzes Richards v. Newsom, a constitutional challenge to a California law mandating 24/7 audio and video surveillance of firearm vendors. The law requires dealers to store data for up to a year and allow warrantless government access at their own expense. The discussion covers the potential violations of the First, Fourth, and Fifth Amendments, arguing that mandatory surveillance could be an unconstitutional search and forcing businesses to pay for it might be a takings violation. It details the oral arguments, the judges' questions, and the potential broader impact on privacy rights, featuring attorney Anna Barvir of Michel & Associates.

This video provides an expert analysis of the Supreme Court's denial of certiorari in Torcivia v. Suffolk County. The speaker, an authority on Second Amendment litigation, explains how the Second Circuit's ruling allows for warrantless firearm seizures under the 'special needs exception,' despite the Supreme Court's prior decision in Caniglia v. Strom. The denial means this precedent stands, potentially impacting future firearm rights cases.

This expert analysis from Armed Scholar details the Supreme Court's 5-4 emergency order concerning Texas's border dispute with the Biden administration. The ruling allows federal agents to cut concertina wire while the case proceeds, impacting Texas's claim to a constitutional right of self-defense against invasion. The case is remanded for further factual development.

The Supreme Court denied a stay for Missouri's Second Amendment Preservation Act (SAPA), which aimed to prevent state agents from enforcing federal gun laws deemed unconstitutional. The 8-1 decision, with Justice Thomas dissenting, leaves the future of SAPA uncertain, though a statement from Justices Gorsuch and Alito suggests private enforcement mechanisms might still be viable. This ruling has significant implications for state-level attempts to counter federal firearm regulations.

This video details a critical U.S. Supreme Court emergency election order concerning Pennsylvania's handling of provisional ballots. The Supreme Court denied an emergency request to stay a Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruling that mandated the counting of provisional ballots for voters whose mail-in ballots were deemed invalid. The RNC argued this usurped the state legislature's role and constituted impermissible 'ballot curing.' Justice Alito's opinion noted the limited scope of the lower court's judgment.