<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" >

<channel>
	<title>Charles Nichols &#8211; NewsBlaze News</title>
	<atom:link href="https://newsblaze.com/author/nich/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://newsblaze.com</link>
	<description>Independent News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Jul 2022 21:58:38 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=7.0</generator>

 
	<item>
		<title>Justice Barrett&#8217;s Second Amendment Slip?</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/justice-barretts-second-amendment-slip_183334/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2022 22:57:46 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concealed-carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nra]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NYSRPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=183334</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Earlier today, the Associated Press published an article in which it quoted Justice Barrett as follows (purportedly regarding the upcoming opinions on the Second Amendment and abortion): Did Justice Barrett Say This? &#8220;Does (the decision) read like something that was purely results-driven and designed to impose the policy preferences of the majority, or does this [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
		<media:content url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/606270547" medium="video" width="1920" height="1080">
			<media:player url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/606270547" />
			<media:title type="plain">Justice Scalia said concealed carry is not a right</media:title>
			<media:description type="html"><![CDATA[Justice Scalia read this excerpt of his opinion from the bench when he announced the opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller.  Although the majority opinion was 5-4, all four justices in the two dissents said they agreed with the five justices in the majority that concealed carry is not a right, and can be banned.]]></media:description>
			<media:thumbnail url="https://newsblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/04/Amy_Coney_Barrett_official_portrait.jpg" />
			<media:rating scheme="urn:simple">nonadult</media:rating>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The Supreme Court Second Amendment Countdown Continues</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/the-supreme-court-second-amendment-countdown-continues_183206/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 05 Apr 2022 02:35:46 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concealed-carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SCOTUS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second amendment]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=183206</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Last week there were six opinions left to be published by SCOTUS from October/November. I correctly predicted that Justice Kagan would author the lone opinion published last week. That opinion was a case argued in November. Today, we again had a lone opinion issued, this time from October. There were two likely candidates, Gorsuch and [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
		<media:content url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/606312621" medium="video" width="1280" height="720">
			<media:player url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/606312621" />
			<media:title type="plain">Supreme Court Nominee Brett Kavanaugh said concealed carry can be Prohibited</media:title>
			<media:description type="html"><![CDATA[https://vimeo.com/606312621]]></media:description>
			<media:thumbnail url="https://newsblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/620-Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States_-_Roberts_Court_2020.jpg" />
			<media:rating scheme="urn:simple">nonadult</media:rating>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Two California Gun Bills and an Anniversary</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/two-california-gun-bills-and-an-anniversary_183031/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 12 Mar 2022 01:11:29 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concealed-carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=183031</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[One year ago (March 10, 2021), I reposted the above embedded video from my YouTube channel on Attorney Alan Beck&#8217;s Facebook page. An hour or so later, I checked my email and discovered that YouTube had deleted my channel. I appealed, but YouTube wouldn&#8217;t tell me why I was banned. Coincidentally, YouTube had deleted a [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
		<media:content url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/687027788" medium="video" width="854" height="480">
			<media:player url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/687027788" />
			<media:title type="plain">The NRA&#039;s Incompetent Lawyers</media:title>
			<media:description type="html"><![CDATA[One year ago today, I reposted this video from my YouTube channel on Attorney Alan Beck's Facebook page. An hour or so later, I checked my email and discovered that YouTube had deleted my channel.  I appealed, but YouTube wouldn't tell me why I was banned.]]></media:description>
			<media:thumbnail url="https://newsblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/03/1391859146-85dce30467e47c5d28023fa328a88192e392a97ec458e51acc1b87812dfba584-d.jpg" />
			<media:rating scheme="urn:simple">nonadult</media:rating>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>NYSRPA v. Bruen and Young v. Hawaii &#8211; A reminder</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/nysrpa-v-bruen-and-young-v-hawaii-a-reminder_182717/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Feb 2022 07:33:16 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2a]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2nd Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California Open Carry Lawsuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second amendment]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=182717</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[A reminder that the United States Supreme Court rewrote the question presented to the Court for it to decide in NYSRPA v. Bruen. The question the justices will be deciding is: &#8220;LIMITED TO THE FOLLOWING QUESTION: WHETHER THE STATE&#8217;S DENIAL OF PETITIONERS&#8217; APPLICATIONS FOR CONCEALED-CARRY LICENSES FOR SELF-DEFENSE VIOLATED THE SECOND AMENDMENT.&#8221; SCOTUS Rules 24 [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
		<media:content url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/673064225" medium="video" width="1920" height="1080">
			<media:player url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/673064225" />
			<media:title type="plain">NYSRPA v. Bruen and Young v. Hawaii - A reminder</media:title>
			<media:description type="html"><![CDATA[Please subscribe to this channel, and subscribe to my newsletter at https://CaliforniaOpenCarry.com]]></media:description>
			<media:thumbnail url="https://newsblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Thumbnail.jpg" />
			<media:rating scheme="urn:simple">nonadult</media:rating>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>SCOTUS Second Amendment Countdown</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/scotus-second-amendment-countdown_182700/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 29 Jan 2022 03:45:40 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2a]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2nd Amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California Open Carry Lawsuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second amendment]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=182700</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[There are five months remaining in the current term before the Justices go on their summer break. The justices are currently on Winter break and won&#8217;t convene in private conference until February 18th when seven 2A petitions are scheduled. There are a couple of petitions scheduled for that conference that should be granted, but won&#8217;t [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
		<media:content url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/606270547" medium="video" width="1920" height="1080">
			<media:player url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/606270547" />
			<media:title type="plain">Justice Scalia said concealed carry is not a right</media:title>
			<media:description type="html"><![CDATA[Justice Scalia read this excerpt of his opinion from the bench when he announced the opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller.  Although the majority opinion was 5-4, all four justices in the two dissents said they agreed with the five justices in the majority that concealed carry is not a right, and can be banned.]]></media:description>
			<media:thumbnail url="https://newsblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Thumbnail.jpg" />
			<media:rating scheme="urn:simple">nonadult</media:rating>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>About that SCOTUS Concealed Carry Case</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/about-that-scotus-concealed-carry-case_182547/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 04 Jan 2022 10:44:28 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2a]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concealed-carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NYSRPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SCOTUS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second amendment]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=182547</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The oral argument to NYSRPA v. Bruen took place on November 3rd, 2021. As of this writing, that was 62 days ago, more or less. The 5-4 Supreme Court&#8217;s first in-depth analysis of the Second Amendment (District of Columbia v. Heller) took 100 days from oral argument to a published opinion. The second, and only [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
		<media:content url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/608214567" medium="video" width="1920" height="1080">
			<media:player url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/608214567" />
			<media:title type="plain">Justice Kagan -  Everybody knows we really don&#039;t care what the lawyer is going to say</media:title>
			<media:description type="html"><![CDATA[The oral argument to NYSRPA v. Bruen took place on November 3rd, 2021. As of this writing, that was 62 days ago, more or less. The 5-4 Supreme Court's first in-depth analysis of the Second Amendment (District of Columbia v. Heller) took 100 days from oral argument to a published opinion. The second, and only other Second Amendment case the Supreme Court has decided on the merits (McDonald v. City of Chicago. also 5-4) took 118 days from oral argument to a published opinion. The Heller opinion consisted of a majority opinion and two dissents. The McDonald opinion consisted of a majority/plurality opinion two concurring opinions and two dissents.]]></media:description>
			<media:thumbnail url="https://newsblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/620-Supreme_Court_of_the_United_States_-_Roberts_Court_2020.jpg" />
			<media:rating scheme="urn:simple">nonadult</media:rating>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>Second Amendment Year in Review</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/second-amendment-year-in-review_182530/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 03 Jan 2022 10:27:57 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concealed-carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second amendment]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=182530</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[While the concealed carriers were wallowing in their own filth, I spent the Holidays searching every cert petition filed that was docketed for the 2017 to 2021 SCOTUS terms for Second Amendment cases that were made available online by SCOTUS starting in late 2017. I searched through many thousands of petitions. Except for a few [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
		<media:content url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/651467743" medium="video" width="1920" height="1080">
			<media:player url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/651467743" />
			<media:title type="plain">California Open Carry Lawsuit is now in its Eleventh Year</media:title>
			<media:description type="html"><![CDATA[Please subscribe to this channel, and subscribe to my newsletter at https://CaliforniaOpenCarry.com]]></media:description>
			<media:thumbnail url="https://newsblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/487px-File-Official_roberts_CJ_cropped.jpg" />
			<media:rating scheme="urn:simple">nonadult</media:rating>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>California Open Carry Lawsuit is now in its Eleventh Year</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/california-open-carry-lawsuit-is-now-in-its-eleventh-year_182305/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 30 Nov 2021 10:32:59 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2a]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California Open Carry Lawsuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry Lawsuit]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[RKBA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second amendment]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=182305</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[On November 30, 2011, I walked into the old Federal courthouse for the Central District of California in downtown Los Angeles and filed my lawsuit to overturn California&#8217;s ban on openly carrying loaded firearms in public. That began the first year of my California Open Carry lawsuit. Today, November 30th, 2021, the 11th year of [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
		<media:content url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/651467743" medium="video" width="1920" height="1080">
			<media:player url="https://player.vimeo.com/video/651467743" />
			<media:title type="plain">California Open Carry Lawsuit is now in its Eleventh Year</media:title>
			<media:description type="html"><![CDATA[Please subscribe to this channel, and subscribe to my newsletter at https://CaliforniaOpenCarry.com]]></media:description>
			<media:rating scheme="urn:simple">nonadult</media:rating>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>The United States Supreme Court Concealed Carry Postgame</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/the-united-states-supreme-court-concealed-carry-postgame_182132/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Nov 2021 21:21:34 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2a]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concealed-carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nra]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NYSRPA v Bruen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second amendment]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=182132</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The following is a transcript of a video I published on Monday, November 8th. The oral argument in NYSRPA v. Bruen took place on November 3rd. The video can be viewed at Rumble, Bitchute, and Odysee. The decision in NYSRPA v. Bruen has now been made. Unfortunately, the only ones who know what that decision [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>The United States Supreme Court Concealed Carry Preview</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/the-united-states-supreme-court-concealed-carry-preview_182129/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 09 Nov 2021 21:01:48 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2a]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concealed-carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nra]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NYSRPA]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[NYSRPA v Bruen]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second amendment]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=182129</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The following is a transcript of a video I published on Monday, November 1st. Oral argument in NYSRPA v. Bruen took place on November 3rd. The video can be viewed at Rumble, Bitchute, and Odysee. There are two important, related dates relevant to the Second Amendment in November. On November 3rd, the nine Supreme Court [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Lawyers Lie about the Second Amendment</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/lawyers-lie-about-the-second-amendment_181741/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2021 01:26:59 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concealed-carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SCOTUS]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=181741</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Lawyers lie about everything and so it should come as no surprise that they lie about the Second Amendment as well, and they lie regardless of which side of the lawsuit they are on. Unfortunately, the Conservative and Libertarian press has been all too willing to help them spread their lies. The most recent example [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Is the Supreme Court finally taking the Second Amendment seriously?</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/is-the-supreme-court-finally-taking-the-second-amendment-seriously_181711/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 06 Oct 2021 03:26:43 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[2a]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concealed-carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second amendment]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=181711</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Is the Supreme Court finally taking the Second Amendment seriously? We will know the answer to that question by the end of next June. Over 13 years ago, the United States Supreme Court conducted its first-ever in-depth examination of the Second Amendment right. Having defined what the Second Amendment protects, and as importantly what the [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>An Important New Development in NYSRPA v. Bruen &#8211; the Supreme Court concealed carry case</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/an-important-new-development-in-nysrpa-v-bruen-the-supreme-court-concealed-carry-case_181574/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Sep 2021 12:52:16 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SCOTUS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second amendment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=181574</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Justice Scalia read an excerpt of his opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller from the bench when he announced the opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller. The part of the Heller opinion he read was from the beginning of Section III that began with saying that prohibitions on concealed carry do not violate [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Demetreus A. Keahey v. Dave Marquis, Warden &#8211; SCOTUS 2021 Long Conference Countdown</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/demetreus-a-keahey-v-dave-marquis-warden-scotus-2021-long-conference-countdown_181570/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 17 Sep 2021 03:16:49 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second amendment]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=181570</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[This is probably the most important cert petition filed this term and ranks close to the top of all cert petitions ever filed. The Second Amendment is meaningless if the government can prosecute you but the judge won&#8217;t allow you to claim you acted in self-defense. The question presented is: Whether the failure to give [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>ANJRP v. Grewal, Attorney General of New Jersey &#8211; Magazine ban &#8211; SCOTUS 2021 Long Conference Countdown</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/anjrp-v-grewal-attorney-general-of-new-jersey-magazine-ban-scotus-2021-long-conference-countdown_181548/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2021 05:05:28 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=181548</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[New Jersey has banned the possession of magazines that hold more than ten rounds. The questions presented in the cert petition are: 1. Whether a blanket, retrospective, and confiscatory law prohibiting ordinary law-abiding citizens from possessing magazines in common use violates the Second Amendment. 2. Whether a law dispossessing citizens without compensation of property that [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>George K. Young, Jr., v. Hawaii, et al. Second Amendment &#8211; SCOTUS 2021 Long Conference Countdown</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/george-k-young-jr-v-hawaii-et-al-second-amendment-scotus-2021-long-conference-countdown_181544/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 15 Sep 2021 02:57:31 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concealed-carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SCOTUS]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=181544</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In this case, an en banc panel of the 9th circuit court of appeals held that all small and concealable arms, not just handguns, are not protected by the Second Amendment and therefore there is no right to carry them, openly or concealed in public. The two questions presented in Mr. Young&#8217;s cert petition are. [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
		<media:content url="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4cg_1J3Dj0E" medium="video" width="1280" height="720">
			<media:player url="https://www.youtube.com/embed/4cg_1J3Dj0E" />
			<media:title type="plain">12-17808 George Young, Jr. v. State of Hawaii</media:title>
			<media:description type="html"><![CDATA[George Young appeals from the district court&#039;s dismissal of his civil rights action challenging under the Second Amendment provisions of Hawaii law pertainin...]]></media:description>
			<media:thumbnail url="https://newsblaze.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Alan-Beck.jpg" />
			<media:rating scheme="urn:simple">nonadult</media:rating>
		</media:content>
	</item>
		<item>
		<title>New Jersey Handgun Carry Cert Petition &#8211; SCOTUS 2021 Long Conference Countdown</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/new-jersey-handgun-carry-cert-petition-scotus-2021-long-conference-countdown_181510/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Sep 2021 05:51:55 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concealed-carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SCOTUS]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second amendment]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=181510</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[I&#8217;ve published a couple of videos about this cert petition. This is what I had to say about Reb Russell, II, Petitioner v. New Jersey prior to the granting of the NYSRPA v. Bruen cert petition and before the filing of the Brief In Opposition by New Jersey. Unless a &#8220;carry&#8221; cert petition is granted [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Keep an eye on the Second Amendment cert petitions Scheduled for the Supreme Court long conference of 9/27/2021</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/keep-an-eye-on-the-second-amendment-cert-petitions-scheduled-for-the-supreme-court-long-conference-of-9-27-2021_181506/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Sep 2021 04:08:46 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[second amendment]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=181506</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Although pretty much everyone is focused on the NYSRPA v. Bruen concealed carry case scheduled for oral argument on November 3rd, it is the Second Amendment and related petitions scheduled for the &#8220;long conference&#8221; of September 27th that we need to worry about. There are over 1,200 petitions scheduled for the Supreme Court Long Conference [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Will the Supreme Court Dismiss the NRA&#8217;s Concealed Carry Case as Improvidently Granted?</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/will-the-supreme-court-dismiss-the-nras-concealed-carry-case-as-improvidently-granted_180845/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 15 Jul 2021 05:56:19 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=180845</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The National Rifle Association lawyers had one simple question to answer in its concealed carry lawsuit before the Supreme Court, NYSRPA v. Bruen (formerly NYSRPA v. Corlett). And that question is: &#8220;Whether the State&#8217;s denial of petitioners&#8217; applications for concealed-carry licenses for self-defense violated the Second Amendment.&#8221; The NRA lawyers had this one simple question [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>Young v. Hawaii &#8211; Did the 9th Circuit say There is no Second AmendmentRight to Bear Arms?</title>
		<link>https://newsblaze.com/business/legal/young-v-hawaii-did-the-9th-circuit-say-there-is-no-second-amendment-right-to-bear-arms_176469/</link>
		
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Charles Nichols]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 04 Apr 2021 13:02:08 +0000</pubDate>
				<category><![CDATA[Legal]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[California Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[concealed-carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[national rifle association]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nichols v. Brown]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nichols v. Harris]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nichols v. Newom]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[nra]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Open Carry]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Young v. Hawaii]]></category>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newsblaze.com/?p=176469</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[The 9th circuit en banc decision in Young v. Hawaii came close to saying that there is no right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to bear arms outside of the home but it did not go that far. Whether or not there is a right to openly carry any loaded and unloaded firearm outside of [&#8230;]]]></description>
		
		
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
