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

« More "the government will protect you" | Main | Media coverage of gun at rally »

Reply briefs in Chicago gun case

Posted by David Hardy · 19 August 2009 07:16 PM

Alan Gura's reply is here, in pdf. It's the reply (last document) on petition for cert. (moving that the Court take the case -- if it does there will be another round of briefing on the question of who should win).

My latest article is quoted at pp. 9-10.

The Court is now in summer recess. It comes back the first Monday in October to start the new Term, and will probably take a vote on this pretty quickly thereafter.

· Chicago gun case

2 Comments | Leave a comment

fwb | August 20, 2009 10:32 AM | Reply

Since the courts are ALWAYS behind, why the hell do they get ANY recess? I'm all for establishing night and grave yard shifts for judges so that cases can be dealt with 24/7 with no time off for good behavior.

Tiocfaidh ar la!

Carl in Chicago | August 20, 2009 5:25 PM | Reply

David, I am pleased to see that article of yours so consistently referenced by Gura. If the high court is to conduct the incorporation analysis required by their later cases ... then the original intent of the 14A will be inescapable.

Thanks again for all your efforts toward a historically honest discussion of the issues at hand.

Leave a comment