US Supreme Court to Hear Second Amendment Case

[Mark Murray]

Sometime next year, the SCOTUS (Supreme Court of the United States) will hear the case started in DC (District of Columbia). This will turn out to be an important ruling for the United States. We certainly live in interesting times.


Couple of articles:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...112000893.html

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/20/wa...scotus.html?hp

[Mark Murray]

More detailed analysis here:

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncateg...e-on-gun-case/

Here is the way the Court phrased the granted issue:

“Whether the following provisions — D.C. Code secs. 7-2502.02(a)(4), 22-4504(a), and 7-2507.02 — violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes?”

[Mark Murray]

A detailed analysis of the Second Amendment by the US DOJ (Department of Justice):

http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/secondamendment2.pdf

[Mark Murray]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/bloomberg/20...g/aqzrvxk0_fko

and there's a Wiki page on it also,

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parker_...ct_of_Columbia

[Mark Murray]

http://www.roanoke.com/politics/wb/143971

RICHMOND -- Virginia will join other states in urging the U.S. Supreme Court to decide that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to own firearms, Attorney General Bob McDonnell said Tuesday.

(More at link)

[Mark Murray]

Supposedly:

At the DC Circuit level:
Pro-DC (anti-gun rights) - MA, MD, NJ, cities of Boston, Chicago, New York, San Francisco

Pro-Parker (pro-gun rights) - TX, AL, AR, CO, FL, GA, MI, MN, NE, ND, OH, UT, WY


At the Supreme Court (petition stage):
Pro-DC (anti-gun rights) - NY, HI, IL, MD

Pro-Heller (pro-gun rights) - none


At the Supreme Court (post-certiorari stage):
Pro-DC (anti-gun rights) - none yet

Pro-Heller (pro-gun rights) - TX, AR, MT, MO, ID, MI, CO, VA

[Jim Sorrentino]

Hi Mark,

One of the three attorneys on the pro-gun side, Clark Neily, trains at Aikido of Northern Virginia! Clark had an excellent shodan test on December 15. Let's hope it's a good omen for this case!

For more information about the litigation and the attorneys, please visit http://dcguncase.com/blog/about-us/.

See you on the mat!

Jim

[Mark Murray]

Hi Mark,

One of the three attorneys on the pro-gun side, Clark Neily, trains at Aikido of Northern Virginia! Clark had an excellent shodan test on December 15. Let's hope it's a good omen for this case!

For more information about the litigation and the attorneys, please visit http://dcguncase.com/blog/about-us/.

See you on the mat!

Jim

Hi Jim,
Congrats to Clark on the shodan.

Found this paper online:
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.c...act_id=1077908
You can download the PDF from the links at the bottom of the page.

I haven't read it yet, but thought people might like to know it's there.

Mark

[Mark Murray]

D.C.: 2nd Amendment Does Not Apply Here
By MATTHEW BARAKAT:
http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5h...xpxJAD8TVCV880

Leibowitz's Canticle:
http://canticleforleibowitz.blogspot...e-to-make.html

Article from Fred Thompson on the issue:
http://www.hawaiireporter.com/story....6-17da3213aaee
(How many Presidential candidates have you heard talk about this issue?)

Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...010402538.html
(There is a link near the bottom of the page to the actual brief.

[Mark Murray]

http://www.heritage.org/Research/LegalIssues/wm1775.cfm

Although some thoughtful lovers of liberty have lamented the half-empty aspects of the U.S. Solicitor General's recently-filed brief in the D.C. gun ban case (District of Columbia v. Heller), the portion that is full is legally far more significant in securing Second Amendment rights in the arena that counts most: the Supreme Court. On careful analysis, the brief's departures from sound principle are internally inconsistent and otherwise not particularly effective. Americans should recognize the importance of the government's concessions to individual liberty and ignore its predictable, bureaucratic attempt to defend existing federal laws. That is what the High Court is most likely to do.

(More at link ...)

[Mark Murray]

The document can be found here:
http://www.gurapossessky.com/news/parker/pleadings.html

Click on the top link, "Respondent's Brief". It's a PDF File.

[Mark Murray]

http://canticleforleibowitz.blogspot...th-effect.html

I'd like to post the complete thing, but I haven't asked for permission. Good read, though.

[Mark Murray]

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncateg...-in-guns-case/

Keep watching for updates ...

[Geoff]

Can anyone explain why the Bush administration would encourage the DOJ to submit a brief opposing the lower court ruling that led to the SCOTUS Heller case? From what I understand the DOJ brief asserts that while Heller is probably right in maintaining that the Second Am. preserves an individual right to firearms ownership the Bush administration believes it is within the scope of its power to remove citizens' rights to own firearms whenever it deems necessary. This is like saying, "(wink,wink) Sure you have an individual right garrunteed in the Second Amendment; we just have the power to restrict that right in circumstances as we wish."

This doesn't sound like a conservative position to me. Instead it sounds like a power grab by the government in sheep's clothing.

Can someone with a legal background explain the rational for the DOJ brief to me?

[Surgere]

From what I read, it seems like the presidential administration (regardless of who is in office) has a duty to support congressional rulings already in place: in this case, the DC gun ban.
...but I do not have any legal background.