« US v. Miller (1939) | Main | Cory Maye gets a new trial! »
NRA's Chicago brief
Pdf is here. Between this and Petitioner's brief, I think the ground is covered very well. Petitioner emphasizes incorporation under the privileges or immunities clause (which makes far more sense) and NRA emphasizes incorporation under the due process clause (which is simpler to do).
NRA files, not as an amicus, but as respondent in support of petitioner. In case you wonder what that is -- NRA also filed an appeal (a petition for cert.), but the Supreme Court took the SAF case and not the NRA one, which remains pending. The Clerk ruled that NRA, being a party to the other appeal, was entitled to file as if it were a party (meaning a longer brief, but deadline yesterday). It'd obviously be in support of the Petitioner. But custom is that anyone not a petitioner and not an amicus is a respondent. So they wound up as Respondent in Support of Petitioner).
Comments
Excellent brief. It gives the justices three ways to rule in our favor.
Posted by: SGD at November 17, 2009 10:18 AM
I thought it was a lot better than the Gura brief, which was just ok. NRA had a lot more and clearer examples of original intent.
Posted by: matt d at November 17, 2009 01:35 PM
Gura gets to the heart of the matter, even though some on the court don't want to hear it - Slaughterhouse WAS wrongly decided. All it's projeny are tainted. Some wanted to restore the condition of servitude to newly freed blacks, and got a complicit court to help them out by gutting the 14th. Time (way past, in fact) to correct that.
Posted by: RKV at November 17, 2009 01:40 PM
IANAL, but I thought Gura's brief was much more logically structured and clear.
Posted by: Flighterdoc at November 17, 2009 04:32 PM
It is beyond my limited comprehension why incorporation is necessary. The wording of the 14th Amendment and the debates surrounding its ratification are very clear as to why it was ratified to begin with. However, if incorporation is really absolutely necessary, I would much rather see the SCOTUS incorporate the 2nd Amendment under the privileges ad immunities (read citizens' rights) clause than under the due process clause.
In my forty plus years in the criminal justice system I have seen far too many rights infringed and injustices perpetrated upon citizens by government in the name of due process.
Posted by: W. W Woodward at November 18, 2009 07:33 PM
Here is the Rutherford Institute’s amicus brief in support of the petitioners
http://www.abanet.org/publiced/preview/briefs/pdfs/09-10/08-1521_PetitionerAmCuRutherfordInst.pdf
and the Paragon Foundation’s amicus brief in support of the petitioners
http://www.abanet.org/publiced/preview/briefs/pdfs/09-10/08-1521_PetitionerAmCuParagonFound.pdf
Posted by: W. W Woodward at November 19, 2009 07:52 PM