The Gobsmacking Guns Case

"My stomach was involved in reading this brief."

By and
80

Things get visceral as David and Sarah discuss Haaland v. Brackeen, the Supreme Court case that may determine who gets to adopt a Native American child. Then, having picked up their dropped jaws, they parse a federal court’s ruling that concluded that prohibiting gun ownership based on a history of domestic violence is unconstitutional.

Plus: Sarah provides some FedSoc gala gossip.

Show Notes:

–Haaland v. Brackeen

–Gabriel Malor, no snark

By and
Comments (80)
Join The Dispatch to participate in the comments.
 
  1. Deleted Comment

    This comment has been deleted

  2. Deleted Comment

    This comment has been deleted

  3. Chris Taylor

    This podcast was great but also one that created visceral reactions regarding the foster care system. We were foster parents for years, and it was exactly as David describes. The last placement broke us as a family, maybe forever, when a child we were weeks away from adopting was suddenly ripped from our home because a remote family member multiple states away tried to get custody. It was as if our child had died and it was devastating. There is no perfect system but I would echo Sarah’s encouragement for good people to become Guardian Ad Litem to help guide the process to the degree possible. It’s a tough situation described here but for the court to ignore the mother’s perspective on placement is clearly unwise.

    Collapse
  4. Avatar photo
    Kimbaukusfitzgibbon

    Interesting pod cast. I’m a CASA/GAL and I’ve seen court cases similar to what’s currently before the SCOTUS.
    CASA and GALs are court appointed volunteers that over see the child in Foster Care best interest. You don’t have to be there be in law school or have any background in law to be a CASA or GAL. You can find your local CASA or GAL org here:

    https://nationalcasagal.org/

    Collapse
  5. Deleted Comment

    This comment has been deleted

  6. Scott Skelton

    It's interesting to listen to Slate's Amicus podcast and then listen to AO. I was convinced when the right expanded from textualism and began to "history" and "tradition" we would get some interesting opinions. Now we have.

    Collapse
  7. Ebquack

    Sarah, you mentioned the Cincinnati Zoo recently. I thought this animal art auction by the Cincinnati Zoo would be something you’d appreciate.

    https://cincinnatizoo.org/events/animal-art-auction/

    Eric Quackenbush, Georgetown KY

    Collapse
  8. Helbock

    The gun case--- Ladies, take firearm lessons, get good with your weapon and go armed at all times.
    The first time he hits you shoot the SOB.

    Collapse
  9. Alvin

    Regarding the gun case. It was very apparent to me IMMEDIATELY when the Bruen decision came out that the conservative fetish with history & tradition seemed to willfully ignore the fact that OUR COUNTRY'S HISTORY HAS A LOT OF SHAMEFUL AND WRONG STUFF IN IT!!!

    And as smart as David and Sarah are, and as much as I enjoy them, they seemed to just go right along with that.

    It was DELIGHTFUL for me to listen to this episode. I have had a double helping of schadenfreude, and I'd like another helping by seeing the 5th circuit affirm this opinion, and send it right back to the Supremes where they can start cleaning up the mess that they helped create.

    XOXO

    Collapse
  10. Jim S

    When it comes to legalese I am way out of my depth but it seemed clear to me that the judge in question is trying to make a point about Originalism and Historical Analysis and was aware of the absurdity of his arguments.

    Collapse
Load More