Oral argument in Nordyke v. King
Audio here, in Windows Media Format. Great line by one of the judges, when the County advocate argued that while you can't physically have guns at a gun show, you still could offer to sell them, then consummate the sale off the county fairgrounds:
"I just have trouble with the concept that you can have a gun show so long as you don't show guns."
Hard to judge the three-judge panel's inclinations from the argument (although their handling of the appeal suggests they are at least open to 14th Amendment incorporation). Not a lot of questions. They ask the appellant's counsel, Don Kilmer, whether they are bound by the previous 9th Circuit ruling in Fresno Rifle, refusing to incorporate. On the other hand, a judge does tell the county advocate that he should discuss incorporation when he tries to sidestep it. And then the judge suggests that, while Heller does not decide incorporation, it argues at great length that the right to arms is fundamental, is deeply rooted in American history, etc.. County advocate dodges with argument that the Heller right to possess in the home may be fundamental, but here we deal with possession on government land. Judge comes back with, what if this gun show were in D.C., so incorporation isn't at issue, would the result be different? County advocate gets tripped up. (No time meter showing, but this is about 90% thru the argument). County advocate argues Heller sez the reason right to arms was codified was fear of federal tyranny, hence it should not apply to States.
Side questions as to whether, if they incorporate, they should rule on the ordinance in question, or send it back to the trial court to determine the ultimate question.
Disgusting fighting the Government for the rights promised BY the government. Aren't the police sworn to protect and uphold the Constitution? Why can't someone call them and have these folks tossed out of court by the scruff of the neck.....
...oh wait...I forgot. Parallel universe...
Posted by: robert at January 17, 2009 06:16 AM
"Dear Lord, For what we are about to receive may we be truly thankful. Amen."
I wish this was any other circuit than the 9th, given it's track record of being over-turned by the Supremes. Either way it's a crap shoot.
Posted by: RKV at January 17, 2009 07:15 AM
Well, it really is so easy that even the 9th Circuit can get it right.
Posted by: Melancton Smith at January 17, 2009 11:03 PM
We're just lucky the right judges are on that panel. And the timing of this case is a huge stroke of luck. Still no guarantee they will incorporate and if they do, the word on the street is that Almeda won't be appealing, at least past requesting a rehearing en banc.
I'm surprised this case has not gotten more attention. This is nearly as big as Heller at this point.
Posted by: Jim at January 18, 2009 04:08 AM
I, along with other Calguns Foundation board members (including Gene Hoffman) and a variety of other RKBA advocates attended.
The laughter from the audience about "gunshows without guns" comment from the bench was hearty yet polite and seemed in sync with bench's thinking - and certainly did not appear to irritate the panel.
There were approximately 5 Brady/LCAV types in the audience - outnumbered by the 160 folks in the courtroom and overflow rooms. One of the LCAV (Legal Comm. Against Violence) advisers was at the Alameda counsel's table and maintained a glum countenance thru the hearing. The Brady/LCAV supporters in audience hurried away without comment, a local newspaper reporter was trying to find a non-RKBA viewpoint.
San Jose CA
The Calguns Foundation
Posted by: Bill Wiese at January 18, 2009 11:51 PM
Rusty Nordyke is a casual friend, and I am proud of him for his persistence in this case. Most people would have given up faced with the Byzantine-like procedure of our judicial process.
The thing that makes my head explode is the outright misrepresentations by the main stream liars trying to manipulate public opinion on the issue.
KPIX here in the Bay Area said that Rusty had his gun shows during the annual Alameda County Fair. This is a blatant LIE. Rusty had his gun shows on fairgrounds property at times OTHER than when the fair was being held. So did all the other shows - dog shows, cat shows, car shows, RV shows, etc.
Check out the bullshit here:
Posted by: CDR D at January 19, 2009 04:40 PM
The KPIX report about this is less a product of any malice than general confusion in press over gun issues in general.
San Jose CA
Posted by: Bill Wiese at January 20, 2009 12:59 PM
No doubt there is a "general confusion" in the press about guns and gun issues.
But the article basically leads the reader to believe that the gun shows were held simultaneously with the annual county fair, which is patently false. The fair is held for a couple of weeks in the summer, and none of the shows I mentioned are held while the fair is open. The various and eclectic shows are held on fairgrounds property at times other than when the fair is in session.
You'll note that one of the reasons (perhaps the ultimate reason) that the board of supes threw Rusty and his show out was because of a gun related incident at the fair when the fair was in session. It leads the reader to believe that there was a gun show during the fair (there was not), and someone went nuts with a gun.
You can give KPIX the benefit of the doubt wrt to "malice" if you like.
Posted by: CDR D at January 20, 2009 04:32 PM
The press may have got it wrong, but the undisputed facts before the Court (which is the audience that really matters) were that the gun shows had nothing to do with the county fair.
Posted by: Don Kilmer at January 20, 2009 11:37 PM
You have helped create the road map to Victory and defended the principles of the Constitution as well as any of our past heros regardless of what a court of men may decide. Our Republic thanks you and your clients for your service and dedication!!!
Posted by: An Army of Davids at January 22, 2009 01:31 PM