{"podcast":{"title":"Swear on the Stand","slug":"swear-on-the-stand-7111404","podcast_index_feed_id":7111404,"rss_url":"https://anchor.fm/s/fddb5314/podcast/rss","website_url":"https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/danielswear","image_url":"https://d3t3ozftmdmh3i.cloudfront.net/staging/podcast_uploaded_nologo/42490093/42490093-1732466737482-64af1021e8b8d.jpg","author":"Daniel W. Swear","episode_count":193,"summary":"Court decisions are complex and difficult to digest. This podcast is designed to educating listeners on current legal decisions in a fun and interesting way. Researched by me and produced with the assistance of AI.","last_synced_at":"2026-07-10T22:18:10.447360+00:00","page_url":"https://stenobird.com/podcast/swear-on-the-stand-7111404"},"episode":{"title":"United States v. Hemani: Second Amendment and Substance Use","slug":"united-states-v-hemani-second-amendment-and-substance-use","published_at":"2026-06-25T00:14:57+00:00","page_url":"https://stenobird.com/podcast/swear-on-the-stand-7111404/united-states-v-hemani-second-amendment-and-substance-use","show_page_url":"https://stenobird.com/podcast/swear-on-the-stand-7111404","url":"https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/danielswear/episodes/United-States-v--Hemani-Second-Amendment-and-Substance-Use-e3l6sf5","audio_url":"https://anchor.fm/s/fddb5314/podcast/play/121909157/https%3A%2F%2Fd3ctxlq1ktw2nl.cloudfront.net%2Fstaging%2F2026-5-23%2Fdece142a-7150-dc0b-e8a4-2e80634e57b2.m4a","summary":"This episode is a Supreme Court syllabus and opinion from the case United States v. Hemani , which addresses the intersection of Second Amendment rights and federal drug laws. The Court ruled that 18 U. S. C. §922(g)(3) , a statute disarming "unlawful users" of controlled substances, is unconstitutional when applied to individuals based solely on regular marijuana use . Justice Gorsuch’s majority opinion clarifies that the government failed to provide a historical analogue for such a broad ban, noting that ancestral "habitual drunkard" laws only targeted those who were mentally incapacitated or dangerous. While the decision is narrow and does not invalidate other firearm restrictions, it emphasizes that marijuana users cannot be categorically stripped of self-defense rights without individualized proof of risk. Separate concurrences by Justices Thomas, Jackson, and Alito further explore the limits of the Commerce Clause , the difficulties of the Court's history-based legal framework, and the widespread social acceptance of modern cannabis use.","meta_description":"This episode is a Supreme Court syllabus and opinion from the case United States v. Hemani , which addresses the intersection of Second Amendment rights a…","key_points":[],"chapters":[],"topics":[],"duration_seconds":1862,"processing_state":"not_requested","actions":[{"name":"request_transcript","method":"POST","url":"https://stenobird.com/v1/public/podcasts/swear-on-the-stand-7111404/episodes/united-states-v-hemani-second-amendment-and-substance-use/transcription-requests","description":"Idempotently request low-priority transcript generation for this episode."},{"name":"read_markdown","method":"GET","url":"https://stenobird.com/podcast/swear-on-the-stand-7111404/united-states-v-hemani-second-amendment-and-substance-use.md","description":"Read the agent-friendly Markdown representation of this episode resource."}]}}