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

« Bob Barr's candidacy | Main | Article on the Chicago handgun ban »

Nothing in Heller today

Posted by David Hardy · 19 June 2008 07:46 AM

Court announced six or seven ops this morning, leaving ten to go. Next opinion day is Monday. Court is considered likely to add on an extra opinion day -- ten in one day is more than it likes to issue.

Of cases argued in Feb. two remain, and of March, two, incl. Heller. As often is the case, they save the controversial ones for last (one Feb. case is the punitive damages in Exxon-Valdez oil spill, and for March there's Heller). I suppose with the controversial ones, there's a lot of internal negotiation, additions to opinions to answer the opposing opinions, and stress on getting it nearly perfect.

The Court CAN put over a ruling until its next Term (October) but I think it's a very rare event.

· Parker v. DC

6 Comments | Leave a comment

Tom | June 19, 2008 8:38 AM | Reply

you think they'd do that with the election?

Don Gwinn | June 19, 2008 9:21 AM | Reply

And the riots?

Dave Moore | June 19, 2008 10:03 AM | Reply

A number of professional court watchers have opined that they will postpone the decision to the next term because a decision this crucial, and this precedent setting, is itself a rare event, one for the history books.

They want to get it right, every jot and tittle, and it seems reasonable that they'd take their time reviewing all the briefs, double checking the original sources, and nailing down every footnote.

Of course, all they really have to say is, "'The right of the people', you idiots, 'shall not be infringed'. Affirmed. Now if you'll excuse us, we're off to the range.", but it's my understanding the Justices are rarely that concise.

Ed S. | June 19, 2008 10:37 AM | Reply

if the Court makes the "right" ruling on Heller, are there stores in DC that can sell pistols to residents? Or are they still out of luck with no source. (Assuming they can cross the border for rifles/shotguns, but no pistols.)

Steve Wright | June 19, 2008 10:42 AM | Reply

Or perhaps they are still struggling for enough references to dispute the 47 well written pro-Heller Amicus Briefs so that they can find against the individual right of the 2nd amendment. That may take awhile too.

From what I've read, Justice Roberts likes to get large majorities and is willing to negotiate to get them.

It's hard to imagine an anti-individual group ruling ... but lots of things happen that I have trouble imagining.

anon | June 19, 2008 2:49 PM | Reply

"are there stores in DC that can sell pistols to residents?"

No, not currently.

And DC has already refused to grant a business license to a current FFL holder who is trying to open a retail store. The FFL holder in question currently services police officers and security companies by appointment only.

The Washington City Paper spoke with the guy for the May 7 2008 article "Jumping the Gun"

"http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/display.php?id=35551"

Leave a comment