#bruen — Public Fediverse posts
Live and recent posts from across the Fediverse tagged #bruen, aggregated by home.social.
-
Four years ago, the conservative justices on the Supreme Court decided that gun laws must be rooted in history in order to comply with the Second Amendment.
But they are not always comfortable with the reality this analysis unearths.
The Supreme Court heard oral argument on Tuesday in
"Wolford v. Lopez",
a case about whether states can ban people from carrying concealed firearms on private property without getting the owner’s consent.Under the Hawaii law at issue, any armed person who wants to enter a shopping center, restaurant, or other privately owned property that is open to the public needs “express authorization” first
—for example, a sign at a store’s entrance or a verbal “okay” from an employee.
Gun laws like Hawaii’s are often called “vampire rules” because,
like the rules that applied to vampires in Bram Stoker’s Dracula,
they keep out a deadly threat unless the deadly threat receives an explicit invitation to enter.Hawaii enacted its law in 2023 in response to "New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen", a 2022 Supreme Court case that created a new test for determining the constitutionality of gun control laws.
Under #Bruen, laws that regulate “the right of the people to keep and bear arms” violate the Second Amendment unless there is a “well-established and representative historical analogue.”
This rigid standard calls on courts to invalidate all gun laws unless, in a judge’s estimation, people in the Founding era imposed similar restrictions for similar reasons.
Bruen immediately caused chaos in the lower courts,
as it called the legality of previously uncontroversial gun laws into question.And in July 2024, after a federal appeals court ruled that laws disarming domestic violence offenders are unconstitutional because the country did not historically disarm domestic abusers,
the Court began to backpedal.Writing for the eight-justice majority in United States v. Rahimi, Chief Justice John Roberts explained that lower courts had “misunderstood” Bruen,
and that modern gun safety laws need only a historical “analogue,”
not a historical “twin.”(For what it’s worth, the author of Bruen, Justice Clarence Thomas, dissented in Rahimi to say that the lower court had understood his opinion just fine.)
Wolford v. Lopez is the Court’s second confrontation with the absurdities produced by Bruen’s embrace of originalism,
the idea that the Constitution has one true,
historically discoverable meaning.At oral argument on Tuesday, the Republican justices were deeply disturbed that Hawaii defended its statute in part by pointing to an 1865 Louisiana law that prohibited people from entering private property with guns “without the consent of the owner or proprietor”
—a statute that lawmakers originally adopted in order to disarm Black people.Nodding to the genesis of the “vampire rule” nickname,
Justice Neil Gorsuch marveled at the fact that “a lot of people” who would normally react to historical anti-Black laws
like “garlic in front of a vampire”
are now citing them to promote gun restrictions.“I’m really interested in why,” he said.
The Bruen opinion, which Gorsuch joined, contains the answer to his question.
State lawmakers digging up historical gun regulations to justify modern gun regulations are simply doing what the Court told them to do.
It is not their fault that many historical gun regulations are racist.
https://ballsandstrikes.org/scotus/wolford-v-lopez-oral-argument-recap/
-
Armed Americans vs. ICE is a Recipe for Disaster. People WILL Start SHOOTING BACK #JonathanRoss #ReneeGood #DerekChauvin #DonaldTrump #JDVance #PamBondi #CashPatel #BrettKavanaugh #ICE #immigration #deportation #SecondAmendment #FourthAmendment #14thAmendment #castledoctrine #Heller #Bruen #SupremeCourt #Minneapolis #MAGA #FoxNews #policeshootings #constitutionalrights #lawenforcement #probablecause #YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PwpvZI0SRM
-
Armed Americans vs. ICE is a Recipe for Disaster. People WILL Start SHOOTING BACK #JonathanRoss #ReneeGood #DerekChauvin #DonaldTrump #JDVance #PamBondi #CashPatel #BrettKavanaugh #ICE #immigration #deportation #SecondAmendment #FourthAmendment #14thAmendment #castledoctrine #Heller #Bruen #SupremeCourt #Minneapolis #MAGA #FoxNews #policeshootings #constitutionalrights #lawenforcement #probablecause #YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PwpvZI0SRM
-
Armed Americans vs. ICE is a Recipe for Disaster. People WILL Start SHOOTING BACK #JonathanRoss #ReneeGood #DerekChauvin #DonaldTrump #JDVance #PamBondi #CashPatel #BrettKavanaugh #ICE #immigration #deportation #SecondAmendment #FourthAmendment #14thAmendment #castledoctrine #Heller #Bruen #SupremeCourt #Minneapolis #MAGA #FoxNews #policeshootings #constitutionalrights #lawenforcement #probablecause #YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PwpvZI0SRM
-
Armed Americans vs. ICE is a Recipe for Disaster. People WILL Start SHOOTING BACK #JonathanRoss #ReneeGood #DerekChauvin #DonaldTrump #JDVance #PamBondi #CashPatel #BrettKavanaugh #ICE #immigration #deportation #SecondAmendment #FourthAmendment #14thAmendment #castledoctrine #Heller #Bruen #SupremeCourt #Minneapolis #MAGA #FoxNews #policeshootings #constitutionalrights #lawenforcement #probablecause #YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PwpvZI0SRM
-
Armed Americans vs. ICE is a Recipe for Disaster. People WILL Start SHOOTING BACK #JonathanRoss #ReneeGood #DerekChauvin #DonaldTrump #JDVance #PamBondi #CashPatel #BrettKavanaugh #ICE #immigration #deportation #SecondAmendment #FourthAmendment #14thAmendment #castledoctrine #Heller #Bruen #SupremeCourt #Minneapolis #MAGA #FoxNews #policeshootings #constitutionalrights #lawenforcement #probablecause #YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4PwpvZI0SRM
-
A US appeals court on Friday ruled that California’s ban on openly carrying firearms in most parts of the state was unconstitutional.
A panel of the San Francisco-based ninth US circuit court of appeals sided 2-1 with a gun owner in ruling that the state’s ⭐️#prohibition against #open #carry in counties with more than 200,000 people violated the US constitution’s second amendment right to keep and bear arms.
About 95% of the population in California, which has had some of the nation’s strictest gun-control laws, live in counties of that size.US circuit judge #Lawrence #VanDyke, who was appointed by Donald Trump, said the Democratic-led state’s law could not stand under the US supreme court’s 2022 landmark gun rights ruling.
That decision,
"New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v #Bruen",
was issued by the court’s 6-3 conservative super-majority and established a new legal test for firearm restrictions.
The test said guns must be “consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation”.#VanDyke, whose opinion on Friday was joined by another Trump appointee, said the latest case
“unquestionably involves a historical practice – open carry – that predates ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791”.
(like child marriage and slavery)🔥Last #March, when an appeals court ruled that California’s law banning gun magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition can remain in place,
Judge #VanDyke disagreed, and included a link to a #video of himself posted on YouTube in his dissent.
“This is the first video like this that I’ve ever made,” VanDyke said.
“I share this because a rudimentary understanding of how guns are made, sold, used and commonly modified
makes obvious why California’s proposed test and the one my colleagues are adopting today simply does not work.”In the video, VanDyke handles several guns in his chambers
and demonstrates how they are loaded and fired.He also shows high-capacity magazines and argues that they are no different from other gun accessories that could be added to a firearm to make it more dangerous.
Under the majority’s logic, he said, that would allow the government to pick and choose any of them to be banned.
Judge Marsha S Berzon criticized VanDyke’s video in a separate opinion,
saying he was including
“facts outside the record”
and was, in essence, appointing himself an expert witness in the case.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/02/california-ban-open-carry-unconstitutional?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other -
A US appeals court on Friday ruled that California’s ban on openly carrying firearms in most parts of the state was unconstitutional.
A panel of the San Francisco-based ninth US circuit court of appeals sided 2-1 with a gun owner in ruling that the state’s ⭐️#prohibition against #open #carry in counties with more than 200,000 people violated the US constitution’s second amendment right to keep and bear arms.
About 95% of the population in California, which has had some of the nation’s strictest gun-control laws, live in counties of that size.US circuit judge #Lawrence #VanDyke, who was appointed by Donald Trump, said the Democratic-led state’s law could not stand under the US supreme court’s 2022 landmark gun rights ruling.
That decision,
"New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v #Bruen",
was issued by the court’s 6-3 conservative super-majority and established a new legal test for firearm restrictions.
The test said guns must be “consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation”.#VanDyke, whose opinion on Friday was joined by another Trump appointee, said the latest case
“unquestionably involves a historical practice – open carry – that predates ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791”.
(like child marriage and slavery)🔥Last #March, when an appeals court ruled that California’s law banning gun magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition can remain in place,
Judge #VanDyke disagreed, and included a link to a #video of himself posted on YouTube in his dissent.
“This is the first video like this that I’ve ever made,” VanDyke said.
“I share this because a rudimentary understanding of how guns are made, sold, used and commonly modified
makes obvious why California’s proposed test and the one my colleagues are adopting today simply does not work.”In the video, VanDyke handles several guns in his chambers
and demonstrates how they are loaded and fired.He also shows high-capacity magazines and argues that they are no different from other gun accessories that could be added to a firearm to make it more dangerous.
Under the majority’s logic, he said, that would allow the government to pick and choose any of them to be banned.
Judge Marsha S Berzon criticized VanDyke’s video in a separate opinion,
saying he was including
“facts outside the record”
and was, in essence, appointing himself an expert witness in the case.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/02/california-ban-open-carry-unconstitutional?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other -
A US appeals court on Friday ruled that California’s ban on openly carrying firearms in most parts of the state was unconstitutional.
A panel of the San Francisco-based ninth US circuit court of appeals sided 2-1 with a gun owner in ruling that the state’s ⭐️#prohibition against #open #carry in counties with more than 200,000 people violated the US constitution’s second amendment right to keep and bear arms.
About 95% of the population in California, which has had some of the nation’s strictest gun-control laws, live in counties of that size.US circuit judge #Lawrence #VanDyke, who was appointed by Donald Trump, said the Democratic-led state’s law could not stand under the US supreme court’s 2022 landmark gun rights ruling.
That decision,
"New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v #Bruen",
was issued by the court’s 6-3 conservative super-majority and established a new legal test for firearm restrictions.
The test said guns must be “consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation”.#VanDyke, whose opinion on Friday was joined by another Trump appointee, said the latest case
“unquestionably involves a historical practice – open carry – that predates ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791”.
(like child marriage and slavery)🔥Last #March, when an appeals court ruled that California’s law banning gun magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition can remain in place,
Judge #VanDyke disagreed, and included a link to a #video of himself posted on YouTube in his dissent.
“This is the first video like this that I’ve ever made,” VanDyke said.
“I share this because a rudimentary understanding of how guns are made, sold, used and commonly modified
makes obvious why California’s proposed test and the one my colleagues are adopting today simply does not work.”In the video, VanDyke handles several guns in his chambers
and demonstrates how they are loaded and fired.He also shows high-capacity magazines and argues that they are no different from other gun accessories that could be added to a firearm to make it more dangerous.
Under the majority’s logic, he said, that would allow the government to pick and choose any of them to be banned.
Judge Marsha S Berzon criticized VanDyke’s video in a separate opinion,
saying he was including
“facts outside the record”
and was, in essence, appointing himself an expert witness in the case.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/02/california-ban-open-carry-unconstitutional?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other -
A US appeals court on Friday ruled that California’s ban on openly carrying firearms in most parts of the state was unconstitutional.
A panel of the San Francisco-based ninth US circuit court of appeals sided 2-1 with a gun owner in ruling that the state’s ⭐️#prohibition against #open #carry in counties with more than 200,000 people violated the US constitution’s second amendment right to keep and bear arms.
About 95% of the population in California, which has had some of the nation’s strictest gun-control laws, live in counties of that size.US circuit judge #Lawrence #VanDyke, who was appointed by Donald Trump, said the Democratic-led state’s law could not stand under the US supreme court’s 2022 landmark gun rights ruling.
That decision,
"New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v #Bruen",
was issued by the court’s 6-3 conservative super-majority and established a new legal test for firearm restrictions.
The test said guns must be “consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation”.#VanDyke, whose opinion on Friday was joined by another Trump appointee, said the latest case
“unquestionably involves a historical practice – open carry – that predates ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791”.
(like child marriage and slavery)🔥Last #March, when an appeals court ruled that California’s law banning gun magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition can remain in place,
Judge #VanDyke disagreed, and included a link to a #video of himself posted on YouTube in his dissent.
“This is the first video like this that I’ve ever made,” VanDyke said.
“I share this because a rudimentary understanding of how guns are made, sold, used and commonly modified
makes obvious why California’s proposed test and the one my colleagues are adopting today simply does not work.”In the video, VanDyke handles several guns in his chambers
and demonstrates how they are loaded and fired.He also shows high-capacity magazines and argues that they are no different from other gun accessories that could be added to a firearm to make it more dangerous.
Under the majority’s logic, he said, that would allow the government to pick and choose any of them to be banned.
Judge Marsha S Berzon criticized VanDyke’s video in a separate opinion,
saying he was including
“facts outside the record”
and was, in essence, appointing himself an expert witness in the case.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/02/california-ban-open-carry-unconstitutional?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other -
A US appeals court on Friday ruled that California’s ban on openly carrying firearms in most parts of the state was unconstitutional.
A panel of the San Francisco-based ninth US circuit court of appeals sided 2-1 with a gun owner in ruling that the state’s ⭐️#prohibition against #open #carry in counties with more than 200,000 people violated the US constitution’s second amendment right to keep and bear arms.
About 95% of the population in California, which has had some of the nation’s strictest gun-control laws, live in counties of that size.US circuit judge #Lawrence #VanDyke, who was appointed by Donald Trump, said the Democratic-led state’s law could not stand under the US supreme court’s 2022 landmark gun rights ruling.
That decision,
"New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v #Bruen",
was issued by the court’s 6-3 conservative super-majority and established a new legal test for firearm restrictions.
The test said guns must be “consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation”.#VanDyke, whose opinion on Friday was joined by another Trump appointee, said the latest case
“unquestionably involves a historical practice – open carry – that predates ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791”.
(like child marriage and slavery)🔥Last #March, when an appeals court ruled that California’s law banning gun magazines that hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition can remain in place,
Judge #VanDyke disagreed, and included a link to a #video of himself posted on YouTube in his dissent.
“This is the first video like this that I’ve ever made,” VanDyke said.
“I share this because a rudimentary understanding of how guns are made, sold, used and commonly modified
makes obvious why California’s proposed test and the one my colleagues are adopting today simply does not work.”In the video, VanDyke handles several guns in his chambers
and demonstrates how they are loaded and fired.He also shows high-capacity magazines and argues that they are no different from other gun accessories that could be added to a firearm to make it more dangerous.
Under the majority’s logic, he said, that would allow the government to pick and choose any of them to be banned.
Judge Marsha S Berzon criticized VanDyke’s video in a separate opinion,
saying he was including
“facts outside the record”
and was, in essence, appointing himself an expert witness in the case.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/jan/02/california-ban-open-carry-unconstitutional?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other -
Hawk on the Second Amendment: The Left, Self-Defense, and the Right to Carry in America #Hawk #hawkpodcasts #mdg650hawk #2A #SecondAmendment #Heller #Bruen #Scalia #Trump #ICE #NationalGuard #WashingtonDC #selfdefense #carry #firearms #constitution #gunrights #left #politics #democracy #government #currentevents #authoritarianism #concealedcarry #training #rights #2ndamendment #YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBozywkJWnU
-
Hawk on the Second Amendment: The Left, Self-Defense, and the Right to Carry in America #Hawk #hawkpodcasts #mdg650hawk #2A #SecondAmendment #Heller #Bruen #Scalia #Trump #ICE #NationalGuard #WashingtonDC #selfdefense #carry #firearms #constitution #gunrights #left #politics #democracy #government #currentevents #authoritarianism #concealedcarry #training #rights #2ndamendment #YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBozywkJWnU
-
Hawk on the Second Amendment: The Left, Self-Defense, and the Right to Carry in America #Hawk #hawkpodcasts #mdg650hawk #2A #SecondAmendment #Heller #Bruen #Scalia #Trump #ICE #NationalGuard #WashingtonDC #selfdefense #carry #firearms #constitution #gunrights #left #politics #democracy #government #currentevents #authoritarianism #concealedcarry #training #rights #2ndamendment #YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBozywkJWnU
-
Hawk on the Second Amendment: The Left, Self-Defense, and the Right to Carry in America #Hawk #hawkpodcasts #mdg650hawk #2A #SecondAmendment #Heller #Bruen #Scalia #Trump #ICE #NationalGuard #WashingtonDC #selfdefense #carry #firearms #constitution #gunrights #left #politics #democracy #government #currentevents #authoritarianism #concealedcarry #training #rights #2ndamendment #YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBozywkJWnU
-
Hawk on the Second Amendment: The Left, Self-Defense, and the Right to Carry in America #Hawk #hawkpodcasts #mdg650hawk #2A #SecondAmendment #Heller #Bruen #Scalia #Trump #ICE #NationalGuard #WashingtonDC #selfdefense #carry #firearms #constitution #gunrights #left #politics #democracy #government #currentevents #authoritarianism #concealedcarry #training #rights #2ndamendment #YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EBozywkJWnU
-
Trump and guns loom large as scandal-hit supreme court gets back to work
The US Supreme Court embarks on its next nine-month term on Monday
with public confidence in the court still reeling
following recent extreme rulings
compounded by the ethically dubious conduct of some justices.As the new term begins, the dust cloud kicked up by controversial opinions delivered at the end of the last term has barely settled.
In particular, the July decision of the six-to-three rightwing majority to grant Donald Trump substantial #immunity from criminal prosecution for actions he carried out as president astonished even seasoned observers of the country’s top court.
“That ruling was shocking, it was a rip to the constitutional fabric, and it gave vast new power to presidents to break the law,”
Michael Waldman said at a recent webinar by the Brennan Center, the progressive thinktank, of which he is president.Despite the ructions caused by its actions, the increasingly hard-right court shows no signs of reining itself in.
The first big case of the new term that will be addressed on Tuesday takes the justices back into the vexed area of #gun #controls.
The case, 💥Garland v VanDerStok💥, concerns “#ghost #guns”,
kits that can be assembled at home that are increasingly used to skirt around basic gun regulations
including serial numbers and federal background checks.➡️The Biden administration imposed restrictions on ghost guns in 2022 that were promptly blocked by a lower court, sending the case to the supreme court for adjudication.
The case has potentially huge implications for gun control.
⚠️A decision that exempts ghost guns from basic regulations would punch a giant loophole in America’s already lax approach to firearms.As it is, US courts are wrestling with chaos and confusion in the wake of recent supreme court gun rulings.
In his #Bruen judgment, the hard-right justice
🔥 #Clarence #Thomas invented a new rule that any handgun ban must comport with the country’s “history and tradition”
– a phrase which has set federal judges scrambling to try to make sense of it.The ghost gun case has emerged out of the fifth circuit court of appeals,
which has the distinction of being the #most #rightwing appeals court in the US.
Six out of its 17 active judges were appointed by Trump.https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/oct/06/trump-guns-us-supreme-court?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other
-
Forgive me for repeating a nice story about #TimWalz, from the one time I dealt with him in person. Last fall, I was an invited presenter at a #UniversityOfMinnesota #Law School Symposium on firearms law after #Bruen, https://minnesotalawreview.org/symposium/. At the end of the day, Walz delivered remarks. 1/
-
I don’t have a favorite among the leading contenders for #Harris VP. But I do have a nice small story about #Minnesota Governor #TimWalz. Last fall, I was an invited presenter at a University of Minnesota Law School Symposium on firearms law after #Bruen, https://minnesotalawreview.org/symposium/. At the end of the day, Walz delivered remarks. 1/
-
Mass shootings everywhere in the U.S. Today’s happened in a small town in Arkansas. https://www.cnn.com/2024/06/21/us/fordyce-arkansas-shooting/index.html Meanwhile, also today the Supreme Court made it clear that prospective, categorical gun control is generally not acceptable to it because #Bruen. #GunViolence
-
The concurring opinions in #Rahimi, read together, signal a brewing fight over overruling #Bruen altogether. The concurrences most clearly concerned with this are by #Sotomayer, #Gorsuch, and #Jackson. But I think even #Kavanaugh and #Barrett are telegraphing information about their positions on that. While I certainly hope Bruen comes up for reconsideration and gets overruled, it would be better for the court to overrule #Heller and thus its progeny, which includes #Bruen. 2/
-
The concurring opinions in #Rahimi, read together, signal a brewing fight over overruling #Bruen altogether. The concurrences most clearly concerned with this are by #Sotomayer, #Gorsuch, and #Jackson. But I think even #Kavanaugh and #Barrett are telegraphing information about their positions on that. While I certainly hope Bruen comes up for reconsideration and gets overruled, it would be better for the court to overrule #Heller and thus its progeny, which includes #Bruen. 2/
-
The concurring opinions in #Rahimi, read together, signal a brewing fight over overruling #Bruen altogether. The concurrences most clearly concerned with this are by #Sotomayer, #Gorsuch, and #Jackson. But I think even #Kavanaugh and #Barrett are telegraphing information about their positions on that. While I certainly hope Bruen comes up for reconsideration and gets overruled, it would be better for the court to overrule #Heller and thus its progeny, which includes #Bruen. 2/
-
The concurring opinions in #Rahimi, read together, signal a brewing fight over overruling #Bruen altogether. The concurrences most clearly concerned with this are by #Sotomayer, #Gorsuch, and #Jackson. But I think even #Kavanaugh and #Barrett are telegraphing information about their positions on that. While I certainly hope Bruen comes up for reconsideration and gets overruled, it would be better for the court to overrule #Heller and thus its progeny, which includes #Bruen. 2/
-
The concurring opinions in #Rahimi, read together, signal a brewing fight over overruling #Bruen altogether. The concurrences most clearly concerned with this are by #Sotomayer, #Gorsuch, and #Jackson. But I think even #Kavanaugh and #Barrett are telegraphing information about their positions on that. While I certainly hope Bruen comes up for reconsideration and gets overruled, it would be better for the court to overrule #Heller and thus its progeny, which includes #Bruen. 2/
-
#Jackson concurrence concludes by recognizing that, over time and through repeated appellate adjudication, a stable, workable approach to #Bruen might emerge. But there are "miles to go" and introducing chaos and uncertainty into Supreme Court standards erodes #RuleOfLaw. #Rahimi /25
-
#Jackson is very good. While criticizing #Heller for its radical reinterpretation of the right to bear arms, she notes that it at least afforded lower courts a basis for forging a uniform approach to deciding the constitutional validity of firearms regulation. (That approach was thrown out by #Bruen.) Now, competing historical analyses will consume courts' time and attention. 23/
-
#Jackson concurrence starts with her rejection of #Bruen methodology. She's making it clear she'd vote to overrule it. But, she also makes clear that she accepts it as "binding precedent." According to her the #Rahimi decision applies #Bruen fairly, so she joins the Court's opinion in full. Then, Jackson turns to an interesting angle: the difficulty lower courts have in applying #Bruen methodology. 21/
-
#Gorsuch writes a meandering concurrence in #Rahimi, taking the opportunity to bolster his view of the #SixthAmendment right to confront one's accusers and, more generally, his insistence that any balances between rights and regulations are "set in amber" by the Constitution itself. He concludes by countermanding any invitation for reconsideration of #Bruen. /16
-
#Sotomayor concludes by reiterating her criticisms of #Bruen, which, she argues, unconstitutionally restricts legislatures' ability to grapple with #GunViolence. But reconsideration of Bruen was not before the Court. (Sotomayor essentially inviting parties to seek such reconsideration in the future.) #Rahimi 15/
-
On to the concurrence by #Sotomayor and joined by #Kagan. Sotomoayor emphasizes that she still maintains #Bruen was wrongly decided. But, even under Bruen, #Rahimi is an easy case - prohibiting adjudicated domestic abusers from possessing guns is, under any sense of analogical reasoning, analogical to historical laws regulating firearms possession and use. #ClarenceThomas tries to argue that any difference between historical and today's laws makes them disanalogous. That's ridiculous. 12/
-
What seriously pisses me off about #ClarenceThomas’s dissenting opinion is that he’s basically arguing that we can’t use the #precedent English #law to TAKE AWAY individuals’ #GunRights, but guess what? That’s exactly what they did in #Dobbs. They took away #WomensRights to #ReproductiveHealthcare based on a bunch of bullshit.
-
According to the Court, the requirement that the government must justify restrictions on gun ownership by showing they are within the American "historical tradition of firearm regulation" and, more specifically, by showing that any regulation has analogous purpose and method to historical firearms regs. This is a recap of #Heller and #Bruen. 2/
-
In this decision, #ClarenceThomas uses the #Bruen “historical parallel” standard. He says that the #DangerousPersons categorization in English law granted individuals the right to bear arms for the purpose of protecting themselves AGAINST dangerous persons, but does not grant the government the right to take guns away from dangerous persons & so it doesn’t apply.
Rahimi ruling:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-915_8o6b.pdf
(Thomas dissent begins on p.72) -
Reading #Rahimi, today's Supreme Court decision about the #SecondAmendment. Roberts, writing for the court, starts with plenty of homage to #Heller, the case that kicked off a radical reinterpretation of the right to bear arms, bringing us #Bruen and Rahimi itself. Full opinion at https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/23pdf/22-915_8o6b.pdf. My reactions in this thread. 1/
-
#Rahimi continued to challenge the #law, & the (insanely #conservative #ActivistCourt] US Court of Appeals for the #5thCircuit reheard his case after #SCOTUS’ #Bruen ruling in which Justice #ClarenceThomas established a test for #GunLaws in his opinion: new restrictions on ownership MUST have a parallel in American HISTORY.
The unanimous 5th Circuit panel found that Rahimi was among those whose right to a weapon is protected by the #SecondAmendment.
-
@timo21 it depends because #Bruen says no-ish, #Rahimi says yes-ish. Basically, IMO, this is good because it didn’t rule that domestic abusers have an unfettered right to #guns, but it doesn’t clear up how to devise, apply or enforce any given federal or state #GunRegulation.
-
After #Bruen, multiple lawsuits involving #GunRegulations were filed.
In his #Rahimi dissent, #ClarenceThomas writes:
“…if the #SecondAmendment right was historically understood to allow an ofcl to disarm anyone he deemed 'dangerous,' it may follow that modern Congresses can do the same...
“…Yet, historical context compels the opposite conclusion. The Second Amendment stems from English resistance against 'dangerous' person laws.”
-
Note on #Rahimi:
#ClarenceThomas wrote the majority in NYSRPA v. #Bruen & was the sole dissent in today’s decision.
Bruen’s ruled a #NewYork #law was unconstitutional & that carrying a gun in public was a constitutional right guaranteed by #2A.
#SCOTUS said states are allowed to enforce "#ShallIssue" permitting, where #ConcealedCarry applicants must satisfy criteria, like #BackgroundChecks, but "#MayIssue" systems using "arbitrary" evaluations by local authorities are unconstitutional.
-
Decision on the #gun rights case:
U.S. v. #Rahimi
#SCOTUS upholds the federal statute.
8-1 #ClarenceThomas dissentedThis is a #2A case, about whether individuals who are guilty of #DomesticAbuse can have access to #guns.
When an individual has been found to be a threat that individual may be temporarily disarmed.
Guns may be taken from people who are under #DomesticViolence #RestrainingOrders.
This was the FINAL opinion of the day.
-
Today, a Washington state supreme court judge stayed a lower court decision that deemed the #WashingtonState large capacity magazine ban unconstitutional per #Bruen. More info at https://www.atg.wa.gov/news/news-releases/ag-ferguson-s-statement-today-s-ruling-washington-v-gator-s-custom-guns. Recent scholarship by me on the relation between consumer protection approaches to gun violence and the #SecondAmendment at https://www.yalelawjournal.org/forum/what-it-takes-to-write-statutes-that-hold-the-firearms-industry-accountable-to-civil-justice. 2/2
-
Forthcoming, Yale Law Journal Forum, by me: a defense of statutes that create public nuisance and consumer protection causes of action against firearms manufacturers for failure to take reasonable measures to control the flow of guns to criminal users. Such laws qualify as predicate statutes under The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (#PLCAA). They neither implicate nor infringe the constitutional right to bear arms. Public access to preprint at https://drive.google.com/file/d/15PNxb_uofV9dzCZxQEm6VTKkZboRLNqb/view?usp=drivesdk #LawFedi #Bruen
-
U.S. v. Rahimi is a truly bonkers case pending before the Supreme Court where the petitioner is arguing that a federal statute prohibiting individuals under domestic violence restraining orders from possessing guns violates the Second Amendment. Yet Rahimi’s argument seems plausibly consistent with the court’s “history and tradition” test established by the Bruen precedent. https://senatormoobs.substack.com/p/bruen-and-abstraction. #scotus #Law #supremecourt #rahimi #bruen
-
#SCOTUS seems likely to allow #gun #bans for those under #ProtectiveOrders
The #SupremeCourt on Tues appeared inclined to uphold a #federal #statute that forbids people who are the subject of #DomesticViolence #RestrainingOrders from possessing #firearms.
#GunControl #CommonSense #2A #SecondAmendment #FirearmPossession
#Biden #law #DomesticAbuse #Constitution #Bruen #RestrainingOrder
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/11/07/supreme-court-guns-domestic-violence-rahimi/ -
#SCOTUS seems likely to allow #gun #bans for those under #ProtectiveOrders
The #SupremeCourt on Tues appeared inclined to uphold a #federal #statute that forbids people who are the subject of #DomesticViolence #RestrainingOrders from possessing #firearms.
#GunControl #CommonSense #2A #SecondAmendment #FirearmPossession
#Biden #law #DomesticAbuse #Constitution #Bruen #RestrainingOrder
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/11/07/supreme-court-guns-domestic-violence-rahimi/ -
#SCOTUS seems likely to allow #gun #bans for those under #ProtectiveOrders
The #SupremeCourt on Tues appeared inclined to uphold a #federal #statute that forbids people who are the subject of #DomesticViolence #RestrainingOrders from possessing #firearms.
#GunControl #CommonSense #2A #SecondAmendment #FirearmPossession
#Biden #law #DomesticAbuse #Constitution #Bruen #RestrainingOrder
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/11/07/supreme-court-guns-domestic-violence-rahimi/ -
#SCOTUS seems likely to allow #gun #bans for those under #ProtectiveOrders
The #SupremeCourt on Tues appeared inclined to uphold a #federal #statute that forbids people who are the subject of #DomesticViolence #RestrainingOrders from possessing #firearms.
#GunControl #CommonSense #2A #SecondAmendment #FirearmPossession
#Biden #law #DomesticAbuse #Constitution #Bruen #RestrainingOrder
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/11/07/supreme-court-guns-domestic-violence-rahimi/ -
#SCOTUS seems likely to allow #gun #bans for those under #ProtectiveOrders
The #SupremeCourt on Tues appeared inclined to uphold a #federal #statute that forbids people who are the subject of #DomesticViolence #RestrainingOrders from possessing #firearms.
#GunControl #CommonSense #2A #SecondAmendment #FirearmPossession
#Biden #law #DomesticAbuse #Constitution #Bruen #RestrainingOrder
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/11/07/supreme-court-guns-domestic-violence-rahimi/