Month: July 2022

Today on Legalese we will be discussing the full scope of the natural right of armed self-defense codified in the second amendment. Too often, the modern debate over the second amendment has to do with whether, and to what extent, may people engage in individual self-defense when the government is either incapable or unwilling to adequately protect people.
However, they never question the legitimacy of the government’s assertion of their monopoly on the use of violence. Moreover, should the types of arms individuals may own and carry be limited to those weapons suitable only for individual self defense.

For more on this topic you can read my latest article that expands on this topic over on Substack – https://constitutionallaw.substack.com/p/full-scope-of-the-second-amendment?r=jkc76&s=w&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Constitutional Sleight Of Hand Announcement: https://constitutionallaw.substack.com/p/exciting-announcement?r=jkc76&s=w&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Order your copy of my upcoming new book: https://constitutionallaw.substack.com/p/constitutional-sleight-of-hand-book?r=jkc76&s=w&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

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 finish our discussion on the Democrat’s new “Assault Weapon” Ban bill (HR 1808)
We discuss, in greater detail what the ramifications of this legislation would mean for the future of the natural right of armed self-defense, codified in our Second Amendment’s right to keep and bear arms, as well as gun rights and gun culture. We watch all the anti-gun democrats on the House Judiciary Committee beclown themselves in their frantic attempt to prove they know (quite literally) NOTHING about firearms, especially technical & tactical distinctions; making them the very last people who should be writing legislation about the thing they have proven they know nothing about.
We also discuss a challenge in Federal Court on the New York “Assault Weapon Ban”

Watch Part 1 – https://youtu.be/GDtNFQMHbtA
Stop The “Assault Weapons” Ban – GOA Form Letter To Send To Your Representatives and Senators – https://oneclickpolitics.global.ssl.fastly.net/messages/edit?promo_id=17533

HR 1808 – Full Text of Legislation – https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr1808/BILLS-117hr1808ih.pdf
NYSRPA v Bruen (2022) – https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf
Vanchoff V James Case Docket – https://dockets.justia.com/docket/new-york/nyedce/2:2022cv04075/482488
Vanchoff v James (Firearms Policy Coalition Complaint) – https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6540/attachments/original/1657660295/Vanchoff_v_James_Complaint.pdf?1657660295

The House Judiciary Committee has a new assault weapons ban they plan to vote on next week. This new bill makes the 1994 AWB that was in place for a decade look downright libertarian by comparison.
HR 1808 seeks to ban all semi-automatic sporting rifles, semi-automatic handguns and semi-automatic shotguns as well as a ban on many types of triggers and silencers. All weapons which are in common use for lawful purposes. While this bill specifically exempts the very “weapons of war” it claims to be aimed at banning. This assault on our natural rights acts with a breadth never before imagined.
In This episode we go through the bill to tell you everything you need to know about this bill.

HR 1808 – Full Text of Legislation – https://www.congress.gov/117/bills/hr1808/BILLS-117hr1808ih.pdf
NYSRPA v Bruen (2022) – https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf
Vanchoff V James Case Docket – https://dockets.justia.com/docket/new-york/nyedce/2:2022cv04075/482488
Vanchoff v James (Firearms Policy Coalition Complaint) – https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6540/attachments/original/1657660295/Vanchoff_v_James_Complaint.pdf?1657660295

Today on Legalese, as part of my ongoing series “Ignorance Of The Law” where we laugh at the fact that ignorance of the law may not be an excuse for breaking the law, but it’s often an excuse for making an enforcing the law. Today we discuss the ignorance of Rent Control by looking at a recent John Oliver segment talking about the need for rent control and we look at a series of rent control laws passed in the Twin Cities that are considered to to be the strictest Rent Control Laws in the country.

Studies and Related Links
The Atlantic – We need more luxury housing, not less https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2021/04/theres-no-such-thing-luxury-housing/618548/

Rent Control is fashionable again. But still a bad idea – https://reason.com/2021/12/10/rent-control-is-fashionable-again-its-still-a-bad-idea/

Increasing Acceptance of Housing Vouchers Among Landlords: A Piece of the Affordability Puzzle – https://bipartisanpolicy.org/blog/increasing-acceptance-of-housing-vouchers-among-landlords-a-piece-of-the-affordability-puzzle/

Landlord Participation Study – https://www.huduser.gov/portal/pdredge/pdr-edge-research-052819.html

Does Affordable Housing Make the Surrounding Neighborhood Less Affordable? – https://reason.com/2022/06/13/does-affordable-housing-make-the-surrounding-neighborhood-less-affordable/

Affordable homes don’t increase crime or dent Orange County property values, says UCI study – https://www.ocregister.com/2022/06/02/uci-study-finds-affordable-homes-dont-dent-oc-property-values-or-increase-crime/amp/

Developers Halt Projects, Mayor Demands Reform After St. Paul Voters Approve Radical Rent Control Ballot Initiative – https://reason.com/2021/11/10/developers-halt-projects-mayor-demands-reform-after-st-paul-voters-approve-radical-rent-control-ballot-initiative/

America’s Most Controversial Rent Control Law Is Getting a Hasty Makeover – https://reason.com/2022/03/22/politicians-scramble-to-define-amend-repeal-the-nations-most-controversial-rent-control-law/

Robbing Peter to Pay Paul? The Redistribution of Wealth Caused by Rent Control https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=4061315

Wealthy, Older Tenants in Manhattan Get Biggest Boost From Rent Regulations – https://www.wsj.com/articles/wealthy-older-tenants-in-manhattan-get-biggest-boost-from-rent-regulations-11560344400

NMHC Rent Control Update: Multifamily Firms Reconsider Investments in Rent Control Markets – https://www.nmhc.org/news/nmhc-news/2022/nmhc-rent-control-update-multifamily-firms-reconsider-investments-in-rent-control-markets/

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 by special request, we have a great episode that asks How can Substantive Due Process rights be transferred to the privileges and immunities clause.
We look at the history of “Privileges & Immunities” from its common law and colonial American beginning, to the Articles Of Confederation, Article 4, Corfield v Coryell and reconstruction era civil rights legislation to inform us of what the Privileges or Immunities clause was understood by those who gave it legal force. We also discuss a general framework under which enumerated and unenumerated rights protected under the due process clause could be transferred to the privileges or immunities clause.

Case Briefs and Legal Resources
Dobbs v Jackson Whole Women’s Health – https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/597/19-1392/
McDonald v. Chicago: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/561/742/
Saenz v. Roe, 526 U.S. 489 (1999) – https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/526/489/
Slaughterhouse Cases :: 83 U.S. 36 (1872) – https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/83/36/
United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1875) – https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/92/542/
McDonald v Chicago Amicus Briefs – https://www.scotusblog.com/case-files/cases/mcdonald-v-city-of-chicago/
Clarence Thomas McDonald v Chicago Opinion (Edit) – https://constitutionallaw.substack.com/p/clarence-thomas-mcdonald-v-chicago?r=jkc76&s=w&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

Past Episode Mentioned In This Episode
Constitutional Revolution of 1937 – https://youtu.be/5CyUMQeEgqA
Roe v Wade – Roe v Wade (1973) – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6yb3H54Y7A
Planned Parenthood v Casey – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6OB_ehOL6Uc
Clarence Thomas Is Right – https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Of2X3eRjSPI

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

12:50 CORRECTION – Utility Air 573, U.S. is NOT a regulation.
It refers to the case Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, (2014)

Today on Legalese, we are looking at 2 recent Supreme Court Opinions that curbed the legal doctrine in administrative law known as Chevron Deference.

American Hospital Association v. Becerra, 596 U.S. ___ (2022) – https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1114_09m1.pdf

West Virginia v Environmental Protection Agency, 596 U.S. ___ (2022) – https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-1530_n758.pdf

And how in both cases the Court finally made meaningful changes to begin to curb the seemingly endless power assumed to be delegated to Executive Agencies under Administrative Law.

Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, 573 U.S. 302 (2014) – https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/573/302/

42 U.S. Code § 1395l – Payment of benefits – https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/1395l
42 U.S. Code § 7411 – Standards of performance for new stationary sources – https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/42/7411

And we bid a fond farewell to Justice Steven Breyer!

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