Month: December 2019

Dahlia Lithwick is joined by three women using their legal experience to advocate for people trying to navigate the ever-changing, labyrinthine process of claiming asylum in the United States. It’s tough work, and they are volunteering in the face of mounting obstacles. Liz Willis and Dennise Moreno are from ASAP , and Kristin Clarens is with Project Adelante. Next, Dahlia talks to Susan Hennessy of Lawfare to understand the intertwined significance of impeachment, the Mueller Report, and the Department of Justice inspector general’s report. 

Send in your questions for our Roberts Court special episode with Mark Joseph Stern on Jan. 4. Submit questions by Jan. 1 to amicus@slate.com.

Podcast production by Sara Burningham.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

On Dec. 2, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court heard argument in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. City of New York, a case involving a dispute over whether New York City rules limiting transportation of licensed firearms to ranges within New York City limits (and certain state-designated hunting areas) violate the Second Amendment, the dormant Commerce Clause, and the constitutional right to travel.
Under New York state law, possessing a firearm without a license is prohibited. New York City issues “premises” licenses that permit possession of a pistol or revolver at a particular address, and under city “Rule 5-23” such firearms may not be lawfully removed from that address except for transport directly to or from authorized shooting ranges within New York City limits (as well as certain state-designated hunting areas). Plaintiffs, who hold New York City premises licenses, wished to transport their firearms to shooting ranges, competitions, and/or homes outside of New York City. They sued for injunctive relief in federal district court, alleging that Rule 5-23’s restrictions violated the Second Amendment and were otherwise invalid under the dormant Commerce Clause, the First Amendment right of expressive association, and the fundamental right to travel. The district court rejected all these claims and dismissed the case. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, applying intermediate scrutiny to the Second Amendment claims, affirmed. The Supreme Court, however, subsequently granted certiorari to address whether the City’s ban on transporting a licensed, locked, and unloaded handgun to a home or shooting range outside city limits is consistent with the Second Amendment, the Commerce Clause, and the constitutional right to travel.
To discuss the cases, we have Robert Leider, professor at Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University.
As always, the Federalist Society takes no particular legal or public policy positions. All opinions expressed are those of the speakers.