This video discusses a new legal article titled "Dangerous But Not Unusual: Mistakes Courts Make Post Bruen..." by Mark Smith, published in the Georgetown Journal of Law and Public Policy. The content delves into major Second Amendment arguments, plain text analysis of legal text, burden shifting to the government, constitutional tests, and the examination of historical analogue laws in post-Bruen litigation. Mark Smith, a constitutional attorney and frequent media guest, provides analysis from the perspective of the "Four Boxes Diner," a platform focused on Second Amendment news and rights defense.
This video discusses a Supreme Court oral argument concerning the Second Amendment (2A), specifically focusing on the Bruen case and the historical interpretation of gun control laws. Constitutional attorney Mark W. Smith explains how the Court needs to draw historical analogues from the Founding Period (1791) rather than the post-Civil War era when interpreting 2A. The discussion arises from the Moore v. Harper case, with a link provided to the full audio transcript and relevant timestamp.
This video delves into the historical interpretation of the Second Amendment by courts, focusing on when and how 18th and 19th-century legal precedents are considered. It explains that courts primarily look to 1791 history for understanding the original intent of the Second Amendment. However, it highlights a specific scenario where post-Civil War 1868 history might be referenced to inform interpretations. The content features constitutional attorney Mark W. Smith, discussing his expertise and past work, including scholarship used by lawyers and quoted by a federal judge.
You've reached the end! 3 videos loaded.
