gluegun
Regular Member
imported post
I didn't see this already posted, so I thought I'd offer it.
For those not aware, Alan Gura (of Heller and McDonald fame) is working on the right to bear arms in D.C. with a new lawsuit. Background on the case is below.
The part I want to bring up is in D.C.'s response to Gura's oral arguments:
Gura's reply to D.C.'s unauthorized supplemental
ET Correct: Apparently D.C.'s supplemental was in response to the oral arguments that took place in January and that they were apparently unhappy with.
ETC: I keep forgetting how to spell McDonald.
Background on this case:
It's basically a lawsuit against D.C. for refusing to allow both D.C. residents and non-D.C. residents to carry within the limits of D.C. This, as with previous Alan Gura cases, would have wide-reaching impact. At this stage it's in US District Court, but could easily follow the same path the Heller case did.
The case seems to be doing two things. First, specifically call out and affirm the right of residents to "bear" arms. Second, prohibit the Federal Gov't from denying the rights of individuals who visit DC, but do not live there, under the Equal Protection clause.
If this case, and the subsequent one that would undoubtedly seek to incorporate the right to "bear" arms, goes through the Supreme Court in our favor, no state would be allowed to deny the carrying of a firearm to any citizen of the US. There would of course be those prohibited persons who could be denied that right, but there would have to be a non-arbitrary process by which each non-prohibited person is able to exercise their right to keep and bear arms throughout the entire country.
Complaint filed by Alan Gura - Aug. 6, 2009
Motion for Summary Judgement filed by Alan Gura - Aug. 26, 2009
Gun Owners' Next Victory in D.C. by Robert Levy - Sept. 1, 2009
I didn't see this already posted, so I thought I'd offer it.
For those not aware, Alan Gura (of Heller and McDonald fame) is working on the right to bear arms in D.C. with a new lawsuit. Background on the case is below.
The part I want to bring up is in D.C.'s response to Gura's oral arguments:
D.C.'s response to oral arguments (linked below)
Gura's reply to D.C.'s unauthorized supplemental
ET Correct: Apparently D.C.'s supplemental was in response to the oral arguments that took place in January and that they were apparently unhappy with.
ETC: I keep forgetting how to spell McDonald.
Background on this case:
It's basically a lawsuit against D.C. for refusing to allow both D.C. residents and non-D.C. residents to carry within the limits of D.C. This, as with previous Alan Gura cases, would have wide-reaching impact. At this stage it's in US District Court, but could easily follow the same path the Heller case did.
The case seems to be doing two things. First, specifically call out and affirm the right of residents to "bear" arms. Second, prohibit the Federal Gov't from denying the rights of individuals who visit DC, but do not live there, under the Equal Protection clause.
If this case, and the subsequent one that would undoubtedly seek to incorporate the right to "bear" arms, goes through the Supreme Court in our favor, no state would be allowed to deny the carrying of a firearm to any citizen of the US. There would of course be those prohibited persons who could be denied that right, but there would have to be a non-arbitrary process by which each non-prohibited person is able to exercise their right to keep and bear arms throughout the entire country.
Complaint filed by Alan Gura - Aug. 6, 2009
Motion for Summary Judgement filed by Alan Gura - Aug. 26, 2009
Gun Owners' Next Victory in D.C. by Robert Levy - Sept. 1, 2009
