5-4
United States v. Rahimi
Jul 9, 2024
The hosts critique the Supreme Court case on domestic violence restraining orders and gun access in United States v. Rahimi, pointing out flaws in the conservative embrace of originalism. They ridicule the originalist approach and discuss its impact on the court's credibility.
06:03
AI Summary
AI Chapters
Episode notes
Podcast summary created with Snipd AI
Quick takeaways
- Court's decision on Rahimi case highlighted flaws in conservative originalism.
- Applying originalism led to impractical outcomes in the New York State Rifle and Pistol case.
Deep dives
United States v. Rahimi Case: Second Amendment Rights and Domestic Violence
The recent United States v. Rahimi case highlighted the debate on whether individuals with domestic violence restraining orders should have access to firearms. In a reversal of the court's prior ruling, the court decided that Rahimi, a domestic violence abuser, cannot possess a gun. This case exposed the flaws in the conservative embrace of originalism, where the court's reasoning led to a 'dumb place' according to the hosts. Despite the correct outcome, the case demonstrated the impracticality and shortcomings of applying originalist principles.
Remember Everything You Learn from Podcasts
Save insights instantly, chat with episodes, and build lasting knowledge - all powered by AI.
