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

« DC v. Heller--a one year roundup | Main | Results of Georgia bill allowing carry in restaurants that serve drinks »

Is Nordyke's 2A/14A section holding or dictum?

Posted by David Hardy · 30 June 2009 12:20 PM

Over at the Volokh Conspiracy, Prof. Volokh argues that Nordyke's finding that the 14th Amendment incorporates the 2nd Amendment is part of its holding, and not dictum.

BTW, postings have been slack because I'm still recovering from the operation. Had a complication, infection, that put me on my back for days, and now another -- a tube into me that came partially loose -- and this does tend to reduce blogging time!

· Nordyke v. King

8 Comments | Leave a comment

Melancton Smith | June 30, 2009 12:55 PM | Reply

Feel better soon! You gotta be healthy enough to come up to Chicago for our victory celebration!

DirtCrashr | June 30, 2009 2:28 PM | Reply

Intersting series of arguments and discussion there, thanks. And get well, ok?

deadcenter | June 30, 2009 7:19 PM | Reply

take care of yourself first, blogging can wait.

KCSteve | July 1, 2009 9:31 AM | Reply

Like the others, I'm more than willing to take limited / no blogging now in exchange for many years of continued blogging after your recovery.

Anonymous | July 2, 2009 5:51 AM | Reply

I wish I could understand what you're saying here. More lawyer double speak.

Kenn | July 2, 2009 6:30 AM | Reply

@Anonymous: That's unfortunate, because the dividing line between dicta and holding is an important one. The holding is legally binding caselaw, dictum is essentially supporting information that is not legally binding. Knowing which part of a court opinion is legally binding is naturally a very important distinction.

affe | July 2, 2009 8:30 AM | Reply

"More lawyer double speak."

Yes, because law is the ONLY field of human endeavor which has developed its own terminology and usage, requiring some level of (gulp) familiarization...

Eric | July 2, 2009 9:57 PM | Reply

Miss your posts, but getting well is job one. Best wishes to you sir.

elb

Leave a comment