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
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


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
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
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
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Totally off topic, but | Main | Sheriffs deny signing Brady Campaign letter, but Brady continues to use their names »

Parker case -- challenge to DC law

Posted by David Hardy · 22 July 2005 04:05 PM

In the Parker appeal, here are a couple of filings (pdf format) fresh from the Plaintiffs' counsel Alan Gura. The first is the Defendant's motion, in the DC Circuit, for summary affirmance (arguing that standing is foreclosed by the Circuit's ruling in Seegers, the other challenge to the law).

The second is Plaintiffs' response, which points out that they developed a more extensive record than did the Seegers plaintiffs. It's humorous, by the way, how DC officials start in asserting they WILL enforce the law and then, after figuring out that standing to sue can be proven if a realistic fear of prosecution exists, begin hedging with they would "normally" enforce the law, etc.

· contemporary issues