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

« Slightly frustrating | Main | This is NOT The Onion... »

Not the way to write a Supreme Court brief....

Posted by David Hardy · 14 August 2019 01:54 PM

I refer to this brief, filed on behalf of some anti-2A legislators, with a Senator as counsel (or ostensible counsel, nobody in DC with any power writes their stuff).

First argument heading: "The Court Should Reject Petitioners' Efforts To Re-Enlist It In A Political "Project.""

Let's see, some samples:

"in the wake of a multimillion-dollar advertising campaign to shape this Court's composition, no less, and an industrial-strength influence campaign aimed at this Court. Indeed, petitioners and their allies have made perfectly clear that they seek a partner in a "project" to expand the Second Amendment and thwart gun- safety regulations. Particularly in an environment where a growing majority of Americans believes this Court is "motivated mainly by politics," rather than by adherence to the law...."

"The lead petitioner's parent organization, the National Rifle Association (NRA), promoted the confirmation (and perhaps selection) of nominees to this Court who, it believed, would "break the tie" in Second Amendment cases."

"The Federalist Society for Law and Public Policy Studies published an article this spring describing what recent changes to the Court's composition mean for this very case."

"This commentary is of particular note because it was published by an organization that has such a prominent role in the Republican Party's efforts to shape the federal judiciary in favor of donor interests."

"From October Term 2005 through October Term 2017, this Court issued 78 5-4 (or 5-3) opinions in which justices appointed by Republican presidents provided all five votes in the majority. In 73 of these 5-4 decisions, the cases concerned interests important to the big funders, corporate influencers, and political base of the Republican Party."

"With bare partisan majorities, the Court has influenced sensitive areas like voting rights, partisan gerrymandering, dark money, union power, regulation of pollution, corporate liability, and access to federal court, particularly regarding civil rights and discrimination in the workplace."

And, of course, the rant closes with a grandiose threat:

"The Supreme Court is not well. And the people know it. Perhaps the Court can heal itself before the public demands it be "restructured in order to reduce the influence of politics.""

5 Comments | Leave a comment

Fyooz | August 14, 2019 7:20 PM | Reply

maybe the next time the Donkeys threaten to pack the Court in a future when they've regained the WH and Senate,

the GOP should threaten to pack it Right Now?

Pete | August 14, 2019 8:32 PM | Reply

So they are sending in ANTIFA?

Michael Murray | August 15, 2019 9:16 AM | Reply

This stinks of FDR's court packing, court expansion, and court forced retirement scheme. It was thwarted for awhile by SCOTUS and Congress, but I see no signs today that "principle" will over ride agenda and expediency.
Ultimately he appointed all nine justices by pressuring and outlasting them. I doubt a President Fauxcahontas (Warner) would wait.

Fyooz | August 19, 2019 6:25 PM | Reply

I think Sen Whitehouse is being taken to Rhode Island's bar for this filing, for practicing law without a license?

Fyooz | August 19, 2019 6:28 PM | Reply

"Judicial Watch says the Rhode Island Democrat has inactive status in that state, and is not licensed in another jurisdiction. The group asked Rhode Island’s Unauthorized Practice of Law Committee to investigate, saying the senator not only broke rules on licensing, but also violated ethics rules by attacking and “openly threatening” the high court."

Leave a comment