Podcast on Bloomberg Law
It concerns the PA "super-preemption" statute and its legal problems. I only wish I'd gotten one or two more minutes of time. I'd meant to suggest that there is something curious about organizations (cities) suing to establish that organizations have no power to sue.
UPDATE: the spammer (advertising for a lawyer in India) just got clipped. Thanks for the news.
UPDATE: Yep, the attorney fees section is the important one. As far as giving NRA standing, NRA as a general rule has standing to sue on behalf of its members. There had been two cases where PA courts refused to allow NRA, or the individual plaintiffs, to have standing to attack city requirement to report lost or stolen guns. I read those opinions not as keying on the organization's status, but rather on the idea that the court controversy must be over something likely to occur and not mere speculation, and the possibility that the 2-3-4 individual plaintiffs named would have a gun stolen or lost and thus become subject to the statute was simply too low. (I think the decisions were wrong in that the odds that NRA members in PA as a whole will have lost or stolen guns in the foreseeable future is not speculation but a 100% certainty, so the organization has standing).