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

« H.L. Mencken on Justice Holmes | Main | Nordyke ready to go »

Chicago cases up early

Posted by David Hardy · 21 August 2009 07:11 PM

SCTOUSBlog reports that the Supreme Court will vote on whether to accept the Chicago 14th Amendment cases at its very first conference, on September 29. Results might be announced as early as September 30. Both dates are before the next Term officially opens, on October 5.

· Chicago gun case

9 Comments | Leave a comment

Samuel Chase | August 21, 2009 8:33 PM | Reply

The Ninth Curcuit decided review en banc their gun case (therefore, vacating the panel's previous decision) as a result, there is no longer a curcuit split between the Ninth and Seventh Curcuits. This may lessen the odds of the Supreme Court granting cert., as they may want to see how the Ninth Curcuit's en banc review rules and then go from there. It will obviously be interesting to watch, regardless.

Just thought I would post this comment for readers who may not be aware.

Roger.45 | August 21, 2009 9:09 PM | Reply

We may quickly get to see how Justice Sotomayor rules in a Second Amendment case soon after her confirmation. Does anyone want to bet which side she will be on?

Vasco | August 22, 2009 6:03 AM | Reply

How about Maloney v. Cuomo? When will they take that up?

Anyway, a circuit split has never been the only way of getting cert; Scalia and Thomas certainly would vote to take this up just for the chance to revisit Privileges and Immunities imo.

Carl in Chicago | August 22, 2009 6:26 AM | Reply

Admittedly not knowing how crucial circuit splits are to the SCOTUS ... this is an issue of gravity and enumerated individual rights. Moreover, my read of Heller indicated that the majority wants to hear an incorporation case ... and the cases out of Chicago are the perfect vehicle. I would not be surprised at all if we see four votes to grant cert to the Chicago cases.

Think of it ... a major first amendment (Citizens United) and second amendment (McDonald/NRA) case right off the bat for the new term!

Fûz | August 22, 2009 8:06 AM | Reply

Carl wrote: "I would not be surprised at all if we see four votes to grant cert"

I'm a noob. How many votes to grant certiorari does it take?

CDR D | August 22, 2009 8:47 AM | Reply

It takes four votes to hear a cert.

Also I believe the 9th Circuit's *Nordyke* en banc will occur prior to the SCOTUS cert decision.

Ian Argent | August 22, 2009 9:15 AM | Reply

IIRC in Heller SCOTUS *affirmed* the lower court (and Wikipedia agrees). That strongly implies there are 4 votes for cert. Unless for some silly reason the Heller majority all voted against cert (and I can't see that based on the opinion), this should get the same votes for cert.

Jim | August 23, 2009 4:53 PM | Reply

There is no reason to believe that 4 votes for cert means a ruling we would like. This is all very risky. Even if we do get a ruling we like, it's probably going to be watered down to appease Kennedy.

I'm not saying this should not go forward, just that its far, far from a slam dunk and we have as much to lose as win, if not more.

Tom | August 25, 2009 9:48 PM | Reply

Was standing something unknown at the time of Miller?

SCOTUSblog says "...recognizing for the first time a personal right to have a gun for self-defense, at least in one’s home" (about Heller)

Leave a comment