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 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« Sen. Judiciary Comm. passes Alito; floor debate tommorrow | Main | Google China's censorship and the right to arms »

Seegers v. Gonzales cert denial

Posted by David Hardy · 26 January 2006 08:38 AM

The Supreme Court has denied cert. (declined to take the case) of Seegers v. Gonzales. That was one of two challenges to the DC handgun ban, and the DC Circuit upheld a dismissal for lack of standing (i.e., no right to sue to challenge a statute, absent prosecution under it).

The other challenge, Parker v. DC, remains pending in the DC Circuit.

[Update: Alan Gura, counsel for the Parker plaintiffs, writes:

We're currently awaiting a scheduling order in Parker. Recall that we made a much better record on standing.

The appellees' attempts to dismiss the Parker appeal on standing grounds was denied by the D.C. Circuit in November. While standing remains an issue in the case, the court has also sought briefing on the merits.

Stay tuned.]

· contemporary issues

1 Comment | Leave a comment

Curtis Stone | January 26, 2006 9:10 AM | Reply

I'm no lawyer, but it seems a bid ridiculous to me to require someone to actually be under threat of encarceration under a statute before being able to challenge it.

Common sense dictates to me that I should be able to challenge an unconstitutional or otherwise illegal law while still remaining a law abiding citizen. Basically what they are saying is: Become a criminal and then take your chances. If you bet wrong on how the court will see things (no sure bet in recent times), you are criminalized and you go to jail.

Then again, no one has ever mistaken the Legal system as anything approaching common-sensical (is that a word? If not, it should be, I like it).

Leave a comment