Interviews with Attorneys Blair Nelson and Don Hammond
Court decisions gave us much to ponder this summer starting with worries over how badly the United States Supreme Court opinion issued in United States v. Rahimi eroded the progress gained in 2022 in NYSRPA v. Bruen. It particularly raised concerns about future interpretations of the limits the US Constitution places on government restrictions on possessing guns for self defense (see PDFs of court decisings under Read More link below).
Then, on the last day of July, the Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed a court of appeals decision that found a duty to retreat in MN is required before brandishing weapons even if the person acting in self defense does not harm their assailants. 
While MN v Blevins arose from actions we cannot imagine a Network member doing, the resultant caselaw does affect what MN armed citizens may and may not do to stop a threat against them.
Although one applies nationally and the other to a single state, the bigger implications of both cases created a lot of concern amongst armed citizens. As a result, we had several very interesting conversations with Network affiliated attorneys about those decisions and related issues. We hope you enjoy both the California and the Minnesota attorneys' interviews, and the broader applicability to those of us in other states, starting on this month's journal's front page.
Court Decisions
To facilitate your understand of the issues presented in our two interviews with Blair Nelson and Don Hammond, we have provided direct access the various court decisions mentioned.
Blevins Decision
Rahimi Decision
Bruen Decision
Heller Decision