Of Arms and the Law
Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home
Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography

ISOcover150x200sm.jpg

I've released my documentary film on the history of the right to arms, "In Search of the Second Amendment." It stars twelve professors of constitutional law, plus Steve Halbrook, David Kopel, Don Kates, and Clayton Cramer. You can order the DVD here. And here's the Wikipedia page on it. SUPREME COURT SPECIAL: additional orders only $10 each.


2nd Amendment Discussions
1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Survivalist Blog
The BitchGirls
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Visitors since April 1, 2005: Free Web Counter
Free Hit Counter

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 3.15
Site Design by Sekimori

« No retreat law proposed in PA | Main | Unintentional discharges at LAPD »

NSA survellience opinion

Posted by David Hardy · 17 August 2006 03:41 PM

There's an interesting discussion of the district court ruling (actually, several discussions) over at Volokh.com.

Just two comments:

1. It illustrates how "standing" tends to work out to "if the court likes your case, you have standing, otherwise you don't." Plenty of firearm and other cases have been dumped on standing grounds, on the basis that "I won't do something because it's against the law and I fear prosecution" isn't enough. Here, "somebody in another country won't do something (talk to me) because they fear they might be overheard and prosecuted" is held to create standing.

2. In order to win on standing, plaintiffs had to argue, and the court accept, that the program is functioning as intended. Namely, terrorists and possible terrorists are unable to use the telephone for fear of being overheard and prosecuted.

Comments