Does Connecticut's AR-15 Ban Defense at SCOTUS Misrepresent History? (Ft. 2A Lawyer Alan Beck)

This week, we're looking at an exclusive critique of one of the primary briefs in the Supreme Court's AR-15 ban case from one of the top Second Amendment lawyers in the country.

Lawyer Alan Beck, who just won Wolford v. Lopez at the Court, joined the show to explain what he believes is wrong with Connecticut's defense of its "assault weapons" ban. He reviewed the state's historical analogue arguments, which may prove key under the Court's Bruen test to determine the constitutionality of modern gun laws. He found many of the medieval English gun restrictions the state cited didn't actually do what the state claimed.

Beck said most of the old laws Connecticut cited as total bans on weapons, from lancegays to steelets and handguns, were actually carry bans or anti-poaching regulations. He argued the state's brief was misleading on how these laws worked. He also said it was misleading on why these laws existed.

Beck then weighed in on how the Court might approach the overall case, especially in light of the midterm elections and the possibility of new AR-15 bans coming online soon. He also explained how another of his cases may soon end up before the Supreme Court thanks to a new circuit split.