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

« Gov't takes "ghost gun" regulations to Supreme Court | Main | Hurrah! Gun sales over a million a month! »

"Qualified immunity" as a tool for violating 2A rights?

Posted by David Hardy · 30 July 2023 07:56 PM

A troubling law review article. Qualified immunity is the court-created doctrine that you can't sue in federal court, for a civil rights violation, unless the aspect of the right at issue is "clearly established" by court precedent. "Clearly established" is read very narrowly: it's not enough to say that something close to this factual situation has been ruled unconstitutional, it's got to be identical, or nearly so, and in some circuits, it's got to have been by the Supreme Court or this circuit. You can't sue after having been arrested because someone didn't like the look on your face unless the court has ruled on the same look on a person's face.

What the author suggests is, if you want confiscate a firearm, in violation of Heller, McDonald, and Bruen, just do it, and if the person sues, plead privilege immunity. I find it strange that he thinks qualified privilege is a conservative doctrine; no conservative legal-type I know supports it, and the big 1982 Supreme Court case on it had the then-liberal wing's support, while CJ Burger dissented, and the 1986 ruling got the votes of Stevens, Marshall, and Brennan.

3 Comments | Leave a comment

Fyooz | July 31, 2023 8:42 AM | Reply

Will Baude's papers on Codifier's Errors is interesting.

Tom | July 31, 2023 12:53 PM | Reply

When challenged on the premise of their article I expect the authors will claim that they have qualified immunity from scrutiny on account of being Eminent Law Professors

Dave D. | August 1, 2023 8:48 AM | Reply

…Get rid of ALL immunity. No prosecutor, judge , spousal, lawyer immunity or privilege ….all gone. Sue to your hearts content. While you’re at it, eliminate waiting periods and statutes of limitations. But, if a lawyer loses a case, he, or she, gets the same sentence as his client. That applies to prosecutors also. We’re gunna need a lot more prisons.
…Let us call it the Shysters full employment Act. The best idea since trial by ordeal.

Leave a comment