))
What Rahimi Decision Means for the Second Amendment
Manage episode 431618346 series 3579155
Treść dostarczona przez Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions, Kelly Roskam, Tim Carey, and Kari Still. Cała zawartość podcastów, w tym odcinki, grafika i opisy podcastów, jest przesyłana i udostępniana bezpośrednio przez Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions, Kelly Roskam, Tim Carey, and Kari Still lub jego partnera na platformie podcastów. Jeśli uważasz, że ktoś wykorzystuje Twoje dzieło chronione prawem autorskim bez Twojej zgody, możesz postępować zgodnie z procedurą opisaną tutaj https://pl.player.fm/legal.
Hosts Kelly Roskam, Tim Carey, and Kari Still react to and analyze the Supreme Court's ruling in U.S. v Rahimi. The Court upheld firearm prohibitions for those subject to domestic violence protective orders. This is the first time the Court has used its recent Bruen test in an opinion, but there are still many lingering questions about how lower courts should use the test when making decisions.
###
0:00 - Introduction
1:45 - U.S. v Rahimi decision recap
4:35 - Dr. Mary Anne Franks, legal scholar and professor of law at George Washington University Law School joins the show to analyze the Court's decision, discuss what it means for the Bruen test and other Second Amendment decisions.
32:30 - The Bruen test and historical analogies for disarming dangerous individuals
38:05 - Natalie Nanasi, associate professor at SMU, Dedman School of Law and founding director of the Hunter Legal Center for Victims of Crimes Against Women discusses the impact of the Court's decision on domestic violence victims and survivors.
50:45 – Implications of the Court's decision on other gun violence prevention laws and challenges
4 odcinki
Udostępnij
