California Right To Carry
Regular Member
The brief can be read here -> http://blog.californiarighttocarry.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/2015-650_brief_1188051.pdf
Amusingly, the state's brief cites Heller extensively in support of the state's claim that states can ban Open Carry. The now vacated and sharply divided three judge panel decision in Peruta v. San Diego, which the court of appeals relied upon is not mentioned in the state's answering brief.
Answering briefs are supposed to be limited to the arguments raised in the opening brief on appeal. Norman extensively argued in support of the Second Amendment Open Carry right and that concealed carry is not a Second Amendment right and yet the state did not cite any case or other authority in support of its claim that Open Carry is NOT a right under the Second Amendment. Indeed, the state in one of its citations to Heller, replaced Heller's explicit approval of prohibitions on concealed carry with ellipses.
The Initial Brief on the Merits as well as a video of Norman's arrest can be found at my website -> http://blog.californiarighttocarry.org/?page_id=2318
Norman's Reply Brief is due in fourteen days.
Everytown for Gun Safety has filed a motion to enter as an Amicus. Some of you may be aware that "Everytown" filed an Amicus in the 9th Circuit en banc case of Peruta/Richards out of California in which it argued that there is no right to bear arms in public.
This time, Everytown claims:
"Everytown’s brief will present this Court with a broad array of
historical materials that were overlooked by both the court below and the Peruta
panel. These materials show that Florida’s law—which allows concealed carry
under a shall-issue permitting regime—falls well within a seven-century Anglo-American
tradition of regulating the public carry of firearms."
Interesting that in the 9th Circuit Everytown claims that there is no right to bear arms in public but here in Florida, "shall-issue" concealed carry is fine and dandy.
Amusingly, the state's brief cites Heller extensively in support of the state's claim that states can ban Open Carry. The now vacated and sharply divided three judge panel decision in Peruta v. San Diego, which the court of appeals relied upon is not mentioned in the state's answering brief.
Answering briefs are supposed to be limited to the arguments raised in the opening brief on appeal. Norman extensively argued in support of the Second Amendment Open Carry right and that concealed carry is not a Second Amendment right and yet the state did not cite any case or other authority in support of its claim that Open Carry is NOT a right under the Second Amendment. Indeed, the state in one of its citations to Heller, replaced Heller's explicit approval of prohibitions on concealed carry with ellipses.
The Initial Brief on the Merits as well as a video of Norman's arrest can be found at my website -> http://blog.californiarighttocarry.org/?page_id=2318
Norman's Reply Brief is due in fourteen days.
Everytown for Gun Safety has filed a motion to enter as an Amicus. Some of you may be aware that "Everytown" filed an Amicus in the 9th Circuit en banc case of Peruta/Richards out of California in which it argued that there is no right to bear arms in public.
This time, Everytown claims:
"Everytown’s brief will present this Court with a broad array of
historical materials that were overlooked by both the court below and the Peruta
panel. These materials show that Florida’s law—which allows concealed carry
under a shall-issue permitting regime—falls well within a seven-century Anglo-American
tradition of regulating the public carry of firearms."
Interesting that in the 9th Circuit Everytown claims that there is no right to bear arms in public but here in Florida, "shall-issue" concealed carry is fine and dandy.