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

« Something I'd never hoped to see in WashPo | Main | AG Holder to testify tomorrow on Project Gunwalker »

Nordyke is decided

Posted by David Hardy · 2 May 2011 11:42 AM

Pdf opinion here On a quick read, it looks as if the majority analogizes the right to arms to abortion rights, and holds that a "substantial burden" or "undue burden" is subject to strict scrutiny, and lesser burdens to intermediate review. It remands for the trial court to apply intermediate review (which means the Methusala of gun rights cases will live yet longer). It will likely be a useful ruling -- which the majority didn't go with strict scrutiny, they went with the next best thing.

· Nordyke v. King

4 Comments | Leave a comment

Jeff | May 2, 2011 1:28 PM | Reply

That's not how I and others are reading it. It seems to say that heightened scrutiny of as yet undecided form applies (so, intermediate *or* strict) applies to substantial burdens, and mere rational basis to everything else.

5thofNov | May 2, 2011 2:10 PM | Reply

Was there any doubt that they would do what was needed to make sure that the Nordyke's would lose? How in the world, can a gun show with unloaded firearms, be more dangerous, than a reenactment, with loaded, albeit blank, rounds?

This dam court has failed us yet again.

rspock | May 3, 2011 8:12 AM | Reply

The real question is - will it be appealed? If not, then it's a blow to gun rights. Otherwise, it's a bumb in the road.

rspock | May 3, 2011 8:13 AM | Reply

read as "bump". Sorry.

Leave a comment