NRA-ILA's Chris Cox has a column about the McDonald case in the July issue of Guns & Ammo. It's not online that I can find, but here's something I'm having trouble with:
This month, the Supreme Court is expected to issue its ruling in the combined cases of McDonald et al. v. City of Chicago and NRA et al. v. Village of Oak Park, Illinois, challenging Chicago's and Oak Park's handgun bans...The two Illinois cases, now commonly referred to as McDonald, follow the Court's landmark 2008 Heller decision, which struck down Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban on Second Amendment grounds..." Can anyone point to where the High Court accepted any case other than the McDonald case filed by the Second Amendment Foundation? Because they did not accept the NRA's case for review.
I'm trying to square the G&A claim Cox makes about "combined cases" with this:
The Federal District Court, though not combining the three cases, acknowledged that all three were substantially the same lawsuits, and accepted Guraâ€™s case rather than allowing all three to run through the court simultaneously, which is not uncommon.Sorry, but I've just seen too many times where credit has been an issue--and it's never been due to SAF.
And yeah, I'm aware of Paul Clement's due process argument. That still doesn't mean the cases were "combined."
Anyone have knowledge to let us know there's nothing to see here?