Month: June 2022

Stare Decisis is a Latin phrase, commonly used in law that roughly translates to:
“Let wrong decisions of the Warren Court stand”

Regardless of your personal opinion in the Pro-Life/Pro-Choice debate , Roe v Wade was a terrible opinion bereft of even a modicum of legal merit and substantive due process is a garbage legal doctrine invented out of thin air by the Warren Court a century after the 14th amendment was ratified.

The only people who could disagree with that statement are people who have never read the actual case brief for Roe v Wade and never bothered to so much as read the 14th amendment, much less earnestly try to give it a good faith interpretation.

Full Case Brief – Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973) – https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/410/113/

Today In Supreme Court History – Roe v Wade (1973) – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6yb3H54Y7A

The 14th Amendment & Incorporation Doctrine – https://youtu.be/LUY7eRa3iVk

Clarence Thomas was right to say as much in his concurrence in Dobbs. This is a position He (and much less importantly I) have held for many years.

A careful reading of Thomas’ opinion is, in many respects, less detrimental to the protection of unenumerated rights, secured by substantive due process than either Justice Alito’s majority opinion and Justice Kavanaugh’s concurring opinion.

This is because he is the only one who suggests how the 14th amendment could be used in its original public meaning to secure many of the unenumerated rights that have been created with the imaginary theory of substantive due process , through the original public meaning of the 14th amendment’s Privileges & Immunities Clause

AMENDMENT XIV, SECTION 1
No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States….

In this episode we briefly discuss why Thomas is right and why those on the left who have turned into violent racist bigots over this decision are demonstrating a new low in their pursuit of political ends through mostly peaceful violence and mostly non-racist racism

Follow & Support
Rumble.com/legalese
locals.com/legalese
categoricalimperatives.substack.com
odysee.com/@Legalese
anchor.fm/categoricalimperatives
youtube.com/user/ReverendBob23
PayPal.Me – https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/categoricalimperativ
Venmo – http://www.venmo.com/LockeanLiberal

Show Suggestions, Ideas, Questions or Topic Request – Legalese@gmx.us

Legalese is a podcast that discusses current events in law, politics & culture

WE have an opinion in the New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v Bruen concealed carry case, and the news is VERY, VERY good!!! Clarence Thomas came through with an incredible majority opinion that will spell the end of the restrictive “May Issue” licensing schemes in States like New York that say the right of self-defense is not reason enough to be able to exercise your right to armed self defense.
In This video I go through the Court’s primary holding and pull out the key information from the Majority Opinion from what is a 135 page case brief, that I read so you don’t have to.
(Actually everyone really should read it. But for those on the go I give you all the important information to understand the ruling in this case and its legal significance.)

Read the full NYSRPA v Bruen Opinion Here – https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf

Past Videos of Mine About The Bruen Case:
Tim Pool Doesn’t Get The Bruen Case – https://youtu.be/8wotWTZlMl4
Disarming Gun Control: An Open Letter To Gun Control Advocates – https://youtu.be/uMDHCR8Kt80
Disarming Gun Control: An Open Letter To Gun Control Advocates (Part Two) – https://youtu.be/drwI3X3rz80
The Second Amendment Is Going Back To Court – https://youtu.be/gIMSj8qz5R0
The Supreme Court vs The Second Amendment (Supreme Court Roundup: The Good, Thee Bad & The Ugly) – https://youtu.be/QizuUeT7p6w

Follow & Support
Rumble.com/legalese
locals.com/legalese
categoricalimperatives.substack.com
odysee.com/@Legalese
anchor.fm/categoricalimperatives
youtube.com/user/ReverendBob23
PayPal.Me – https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/categoricalimperativ
Venmo – http://www.venmo.com/LockeanLiberal

Show Suggestions, Ideas, Questions or Topic Request – Legalese@gmx.us

Legalese is a podcast that discusses current events in law, politics & culture

The other day on Twitter the notable YouTuber and world-class milquetoast fence sitter, Tim Pool tweeted about the upcoming Supreme Court Opinion in Jackson and Bruen. Saying if the Court overturns Roe and Casey and also rules on Nationwide Constitutional Carry there will be less rioting. While there are myriad problems with this tweet the one that really grinds my gears was his insistence the court could rule on nationwide constitutional carry.
After reaching out to Tim to verify if this was meant to be ironic or if it was a genuine statement and it became clear that not only he, but his many followers all genuinely believe this is the most likely outcome, despite the fact this is a constitutional and procedural impossibility.
After trying to explain and finding 240 characters not being nearly enough to refute such a complicatedly wrong belief I decided to make this video.
Not only will it hopefully explain to the thousands of people espousing this with nothing but an assumption it must be correct why it is LITERALLY impossible for the court to make any ruling about constitutional carry and LITERALLY impossible the outcome of Bruen will be a nationwide anything, its also a great primer for those who are interested in this case to help explain what the case is about or to remind you of the importance facts, issues, the question presented and the potential judgement so when the case comes out you will have a fresh understanding of the arguments that were made in the cert petitions and oral arguments heard last November.

See Related Episodes From The Past:
Disarming Gun Control (Part One) – https://youtu.be/uMDHCR8Kt80
Disarming Gun Control (Part Two) – https://youtu.be/drwI3X3rz80
Second Amendment Goes Back To Court – https://youtu.be/gIMSj8qz5R0
Supreme Court 2nd Amendment Roundup – https://youtu.be/QizuUeT7p6w
All Gun Control Is Unconstitutional – https://youtu.be/38PowOyMN4M
What The Heller? – https://youtu.be/1yqvw3E5mvA
What Is An Assault Weapon? – https://youtu.be/FHt1hER8Las
Cooper v Aaron – https://youtu.be/5PM4cEzkxzc

Follow & Support
Rumble.com/legalese
locals.com/legalese
categoricalimperatives.substack.com
odysee.com/@Legalese
anchor.fm/categoricalimperatives
youtube.com/user/ReverendBob23
PayPal.Me – https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/categoricalimperativ
Venmo – http://www.venmo.com/LockeanLiberal

Show Suggestions, Ideas, Questions or Topic Request – Legalese@gmx.us

Legalese is a podcast that discusses current events in law, politics & culture

Today on Legalese we begin with a Supreme Court Roundup, where we will be going over all the major decision from the Court that they have been putting out since late May and will continue to put out until, at least, their final scheduled sate for this session, July 2nd.
Today we look at two recent opinions regarding issues of criminal justice reform. These Include

Shinn v. Martinez Ramirez, 596 U.S. ___ (2022) – https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/596/20-1009/
and
Egbert v. Boule, 596 U.S. ___ (2022) – https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/21-147_g31h.pdf

Shinn was a 6th amendment case to define the role of Federal Habeas Relief in an appeal of a State criminal law conviction. Despite the fact two men on death row in Arizona and are seeking appeal on the merits based on new exculpatory evidence of incompetent representation in the state trial and post conviction as well as exculpatory evidence of actual innocence, the court ruled that for procedural reasons there is no valid cause of action for the kind of federal appellate review being sought.

Egbert v Boule dealt with a man seeking relief for an alleged violation of his 1st and 4th amendment rights by a U.S. Border Patrol Agent under the precedent set in Bivens v Six Unknown Federal Narcotics Agents (1971). In Bivens claims, private individuals may sue FBI agents for violating their Fourth, Fifth, and/or Eighth Amendment rights.
This case was also denied on procedural grounds that Boule’s remedy sought under the Federal Tort Claims Act was in a new and distinct context than the precedent set in Bivens, a case whose propriety has been controversial for many years and has had 11 cases seeking relief under the Bivens claim were denied review and only two have been accepted, but in both cases the appellant lost on the merits.

I do my best to give you a recap with all the necessary information to understand case’s basis in fact and law in a way that will be helpful for people whether these areas of federal law are entirely foreign to you, if you are having trouble with two cases that are very complex and hard to truly sort out without a background in the study of relevant jurisprudence. You will understand the decision, how it was reached and what the implications of these cases may likely be as precedent in the future.

Ziglar v. Abbasi, 582 U. S. ___ (2017) – https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/582/15-1358/
Hernández v. Mesa, 589 U. S. ___ (2020) – https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/589/17-1678/

Follow & Support
Rumble.com/legalese
locals.com/legalese
categoricalimperatives.substack.com
odysee.com/@Legalese
anchor.fm/categoricalimperatives
youtube.com/user/ReverendBob23
PayPal.Me – https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/categoricalimperativ
Venmo – http://www.venmo.com/LockeanLiberal

Show Suggestions, Ideas, Questions or Topic Request – Legalese@gmx.us

Legalese is a podcast that discusses current events in law, politics & culture

Episode #11
We just found out that the Senate has finished drafting its bipartisan gun control law and are being told by both parties they have the 60 votes needed to pass it. While we don’t have the bill text yet one thing we can be very sure of is that it contains a red flag modeled after Jerry Nadler’s 2019 House bill.
What does that entail, and what crucial piece of information about red flag laws have media and politicians completely overlooking that you should know before deciding on the wisdom and efficacy of this proposed bill.

Follow & Support
Rumble.com/legalese
locals.com/legalese
categoricalimperatives.substack.com
odysee.com/@Legalese
anchor.fm/categoricalimperatives
youtube.com/user/ReverendBob23
PayPal.Me – https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/categoricalimperativ
Venmo – http://www.venmo.com/LockeanLiberal

Show Suggestions, Ideas, Questions or Topic Request – Legalese@gmx.us

Legalese is a podcast that discusses current events in law, politics & culture

House Judiciary Committee drafts Red Flag Law – https://rollcall.com/2022/05/31/house-judiciary-committee-sets-vote-on-gun-control-proposals/
Why this policy has bipartisan appeal? – https://www.npr.org/2019/08/20/752427922/poll-americans-including-republicans-and-gun-owners-broadly-support-red-flag-law
Do Red Flag Laws Work? – https://reason.com/2019/10/06/states-are-depriving-innocent-people-of-their-second-amendment-rights/
Red Flag in Buffalo shooting – https://reason.com/2022/05/18/the-buffalo-massacre-illustrates-the-inherent-limitations-of-red-flag-laws/
New York Red Flag Law – https://www.nysenate.gov/legislation/laws/CVP/6341
Rand Corporation Mass Shooting Study – https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/essays/mass-shootings.html
2012 DOD Study – https://apps.dtic.mil/dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a565355.pdf
Alexander Scherr Hastings Law Journal – http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/hastlj55&div=3&g_sent=1&collection=journals
Jerry Nadler 2019 Red Flag Bill – https://reason.com/2019/09/12/this-awful-house-bill-would-promote-gun-confiscation-without-due-process/

►00:00 Introduction
►03:41 Red Flag Law Essential Facts
►28:50 Baker Acts
►33:25 Conclusion and Upcoming videos
►39:07 Nadler Advocates For Mass Murder
►40:20 Closing and Credits

Episode #10
In this episode of Legalese, we start a brand no segment I will be doing occasionally moving forward that I am calling “Ignorance Of The Law”…
We discuss a recent ruling out of the California Court of Appeals for the Third District that found under the California Endangered Species Act, 4 species of Bumble Bees now qualify as fish to get endangered species protection status.
This is a great reminder that while ignorance is no excuse for breaking the law, ignorance is an excuse for writing and enforcing the law.

CA Endangered Species Act – https://wildlife.ca.gov/Conservation/CESA
Court Opinion – https://www.courts.ca.gov/opinions/documents/C093542.PDF

Follow & Support
Rumble.com/legalese
locals.com/legalese
categoricalimperatives.substack.com
odysee.com/@Legalese
anchor.fm/categoricalimperatives
youtube.com/user/ReverendBob23
PayPal.Me – https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/categoricalimperativ
Venmo – http://www.venmo.com/LockeanLiberal

Show Suggestions, Ideas, Questions or Topic Request – Legalese@gmx.us

Legalese is a podcast that discusses current events in law, politics & culture

If you have not seen part one yet, you should definitely watch that first to fully appreciate my building off of it in this video: https://youtu.be/uMDHCR8Kt80
Today on Legalese we will be discussing the issue dripping from everyone’s lips across the nation. The balancing act between gun rights and stricter gun control. Gun rights and gun control are not a new topic to this channel, In fact I have assembled a playlist of past videos touching on this subjects quite a few times from quite a few different perspectives (See List Below)
Today’s video will be the second in a two part series looking at the best arguments for current gun control proposals,. Today’s episode if focused on exposing and explaining the myths that constituted Joe Biden’s response to the recent Uvalde shooting.
In it he makes false claims about so-called “assault weapons”, the assault weapon ban, the supposedly evil puppy hating, father raping baby killers that are collectively known as “the gun lobby”, makes bogus claims about the frequency of school shootings and of mass shootings in comparison to other countries. and the multi-level deceptive non-argument that any restriction on natural rights and civil liberties are justified if it saves even one single, solitary life.

Past Episodes on Gun Rights & Gun Control – https://youtube.com/playlist?list=PL6NjbXOax5B01cxNekIOVZj-PQzyMY17c

Why Background Checks Do Not Stymie Mass Shooters – https://reason.com/2022/05/17/why-background-checks-do-not-stymie-mass-shooters/

Public Mass Shootings: Database Amasses Details of a Half Century of U.S. Mass Shootings with Firearms, Generating Psychosocial Histories – https://nij.ojp.gov/topics/articles/public-mass-shootings-database-amasses-details-half-century-us-mass-shootings

Follow & Support
Rumble.com/legalese
locals.com/legalese
categoricalimperatives.substack.com
odysee.com/@Legalese
anchor.fm/categoricalimperatives
youtube.com/user/ReverendBob23

Contact the show: Legalese@gmx.us