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

« Chicago "reduces crime" by cooking the books... | Main | Humorous report of Lexington/Concord »

SCOTUS takes no action on Drake

Posted by David Hardy · 21 April 2014 02:57 PM

Drake v. Jerejian, the challenge to New Jersey's "may issue" system for licensing to carry, was set for the conference (where votes are taken) of last Friday. Today the Court issued its orders from that conference, and said nothing about the case. It's now up for consideration on April 25.

Conferences are entirely private, so we can't know what went on. I can think of several possibilities. Most obviously, perhaps some Justices wanted longer to think it over. A good sign. Or perhaps they wanted to see what would happen in the Ninth Circuit -- will California be allowed to intervene, which might mean a petition for cert.? There really is no way to say, although either of these possibilities mean the Court is giving it serious consideration.

4 Comments | Leave a comment

Matthew Carberry | April 21, 2014 4:03 PM | Reply

Has the 9th given an indication when they would decide?

Would "waiting for the 9th" in this context involve a Justice calling Kozinski et al. and suggesting they decide about Harris's request sooner rather than later?

The 9th might be waiting on Drake, after all.

Jim March Simpson | April 21, 2014 7:12 PM | Reply

The calendars for case consideration on both the 18th and 25th look very heavy - here's the one for the 25th:

https://certpool.com/conferences/2014-04-25

May be as simple as "they got too busy" (on the 18th)?

Jim | April 22, 2014 2:24 AM | Reply

We always read too much into these things. We can speculate all night and all day, but whether they take it or not, we'll never know why and who came down on which side.

It only takes four of them to vote to grant cert. I suspect the four who vote to take it will know they have the votes to help gun owners or screw gun owners. If neither side thinks they have the votes, well, I guess its a big NEXT!


Fyooz | April 27, 2014 9:25 PM | Reply

"Conferences are entirely private, so we can't know what went on."

The NSA will neither confirm nor deny whether the conference was entirely private.

Leave a comment