Law Matters — Episode 33
Attorneys Alicia Kutzer and Bill Olson discuss our amicus brief at the U.S. Supreme Court in Wolford v. Lopez, a case challenging the constitutionality of a Hawaii firearms statute which essentially criminalizes the possession of firearms in nearly all public settings, such as stores, restaurants, and gas stations.
Law Matters — Episode 32
Attorneys Alicia Kutzer and Bill Olson discuss our amicus brief at the U.S. Supreme Court in NAGR v. Lamont, and how activist legislators and judges violate the Second Amendment protection of our rights, and attempt to circumvent the Supreme Court’s landmark 2022 decision in Bruen.
Wolford v. Lopez — Amicus Brief
For a discussion of this case, see Law Matters Episode 33.
NAGR v. Lamont — Amicus Brief
For a discussion of this case, see Law Matters Episode 32.
Law Matters — Episode 21
Attorneys Alicia Kutzer and Bill Olson discuss our U.S. Supreme Court amicus brief in Missouri v. United States, defending the Missouri’s 2021 “Second Amendment Preservation Act” to protect its citizens’ rights to bear arms by prohibiting state employees from enforcing federal gun regulations that violate the Second Amendment.
Law Matters — Episode 14
Attorneys Alicia Kutzer and Bill Olson discuss the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) and our U.S. Supreme Court amicus brief in Smith & Wesson v. Mexico.
Smith and Wesson v. Mexico — Amicus Brief
For a discussion of this case, see Law Matters Episode 14
Law Matters — Episode 11
Alicia Kutzer and Bill Olson discuss our U.S. Supreme Court Amicus brief in Maryland Shall Issue, Inc. (MSI) v. Moore, a Second Amendment case.
Maryland Shall Issue v. Moore — Amicus Brief
For a discussion of this case, see Law Matters Episode 11
Snope v. Brown — Amicus Brief
Today, we filed an Amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to review a Fourth Circuit decision approving Maryland’s 2013 ban on “assault weapons.” The banned firearms are ordinary semi-automatic weapons and most are “commonly used,” if not ubiquitous among the gun-owning public, except where banned by a few states. We argue that the Fourth Circuit’s decision was really an attempt to circumvent Bruen. We argue “the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct” in possessing such a weapon. Our brief shows that the “plain text” of the Second Amendment presumptively protects bearable firearms and Maryland could provide no relevant historical analogues.
Link to brief