DC vs Heller

imported post

Doug:

Good article. The NRA probably fears the Heller case. In many ways it can be lose, lose for it. If the Supreme Court finds that the Washington D.C. gun control is an infringement on the second amendment and rules that it does represent an individual right the NRA will probably be affected financially. The NRA has lived and survived on it's claim to be our guardian angel in regards to protecting our gun and second amendment rights. If the Court finds in Heller's favor, as we hope it does, then the NRA will no longer have a cause to pursue. It's member's contribution will probably go down as well as it's membership.

If the Court finds against Heller and declares the second amendment represents a collective right. If it finds that there isn't an infringement because Washington D.C. is not a recognized State and therefore does not have congressional representation and that the (--shall not be infringed) phrase in the amendment was intended to be instruction to congress and does not apply to the individual States. Then the NRA as well as all we gun owners will be defeated. Everything goes back to ground zero. Any hope of having another Supreme Court ruling on the second amendment would more than likely be out of the question into the distant future. The NRA will end up jousting windmills and lose it's reputation as a protector of our gun rights. It is no wonder why it is nervous. We should all be nervous. The Heller case could go either way. As I see it that is probably just as well. It's time the questions surrounding the Second Amendment were answered by the U. S. Supreme Court. Time to let the chips fall where they may.

Nobody can second guess our court system. We gun owners in Wisconsin put a lot of faith in the recent Andres Vegas case. We all anticipated that if it got to the Wisconsin State Supreme Court it was such a strong case that the Court would surely find the concealed weapon prohibition statute unconstitutional. Well it didn't happen. The lower court threw it out. Vegas was found innocent of carrying a concealed weapon and therefore he couldn't elevate the case to the supreme court level. The prosecution was not about to elevate the case because they realized the cards were stacked against them. As a result the Vegas case ended up to be of little value to we gun owners. It would have been of value only if Vegas was found guilty by the lower court so that he could appeal to the state supreme court.

I bring all that up only to illustrate how fickle and unpredictable the ferderal and state legal system is. All we can do in regards to the Heller case is cross our fingers and hope.

imported post

Well, today is the day we find out if SCOTUS grants or denies Cert.

Personally, I'm hoping that they grant Cert. This particular case is about the cleanest black and white case that we could hope to get in front of SCOTUS. Robert Levy and Alan Gura were very meticulous to create a clean case.

If SCOTUS upholds the lower courts decision, then it is a victory for all Americans, even those who don't realize it.

I think it unlikely that they will completely overturn the lower courts decision. It could happen, but it is dangerous for them to do that. Historically, the American Revolution started when the British tried to disarm the colonists. Sometimes history repeats itself.

SCOTUS would really like to find some middle of the road position. To thread the eye of the needle so to speak. The genius of Levy and Gura was to craft a case that makes that almost impossible.

As for the NRA, they are like an arms dealerselling toboth sides of a war and encourging the fight. They have a lot to lose here.

imported post

From http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/

At 10 a.m., the Court is scheduled to release orders from the Justices’ private conference last Friday. We will provide coverage as soon as the list becomes available.

So, by 11:00 AM we should know.

imported post

Duplicate Post

imported post

The Supreme Court on Tuesday announced no action on a new case testing the meaning of the Second Amendment. The

next date for possible action on it is likely to be November 26, following a pre-Thanksgiving Conference set for November 21.

The Court agreed to hear one new case, on the rate of recovery of the costs of paralegal services when a winning party in a case seeks attorney fees. The issue is whether such services are to be paid at the market rate for such services, or only at the level of their actual cost. The new case is Richlin Security Service v. Chertoff (06-1717).

Click to expand...

imported post

This just in:



http://www.wjla.com/news/stories/1107/472213.html

The Supreme Court took no action Tuesday in the case involving the District of Columbia's ban on handguns. The justices discussed the case at their private conference on Friday, but reached no resolution.

Four justices must vote to grant an appeal. The court does not always reach a decision the first time it discusses a case.

At issue is the capital's 31-year ban on handguns, among the strictest gun-control laws in the nation. In March, a federal appeals court struck down the ban as incompatible with the Second Amendment.

The next time the court could announce its decision about hearing the case is Nov. 26.

The case is District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290.

Click to expand...

imported post

Good commentary on what "no action" might mean:

http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/uncategorized/court-takes-no-action-on-gun-case/

The Court, of course, does not explain inaction. But among the possible reasons for delaying the case are these: one or more Justices simply asked for more time to consider the two cases; the Court may be rewriting the question or questions it will be willing to review — especially in view of the disagreement between the two sides on what should be at issue; the Court may have voted initially to deny review of one or both cases and one or more Justices are writing a dissent from the denial. The appeal in 07-290 (District of Columbia v. Heller) raises the key issue about the Second Amendment’s meaning — that is, whether it guarantees an individual right to have a gun for private use, at least in one’s home — and the appeal in 07-335 (Parker v. District of Columbia) poses a question about who may bring lawsuits to challenge laws before they are actively enforced. Together, the cases thus present a somewhat complex mix for the Court, and it perhaps was not much of a surprise that no order issued on Tuesday. At no point is there likely to be an answer to what happened to bring about the delay. Both cases are expected to be re-listed for the Nov. 20 Conference.

Click to expand...

imported post

non-intentional double-tap on the combine of the two threads.

imported post

I guess they wanted to sleep on it. Either way, the Vigoro is about to hit the Mixmaster. Close enough. We can speculate all we want, but I hope that at least 4 members of the Court had the intestinal fortitude to take on the case instead of not grant cert and have D.C. write some other, SLIGHTLY less stupid law for the District. I believe the 2nd amendment restricts the rights of government and it was written NOT for the states or militia, but referred to individuals in the republic. Because this is such a controversial case politically and involves split lower court decisions, that is all the better reason to grant cert. It is interesting that the Brady group did urge D.C. to rewrite its law, rather than appeal the D.C. appeals court decision. This is about as fair a court as you can get and the plaintiff(s?) are good examples and not asking for a sawed-off shotgun or anything like that. My sense is that the Court needed more time to put forward the questions they would be willing to try, and I do not think they are putting it off, but that is only a guess. Stay tuned!

imported post

Combined DC vs Heller Thread