Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Law Firm Uses Online Constitutional Source Library to Prep for Gun Law Cert Petition [DC gun case]
MarketWire ^ | 8/8/07 | n/a

Posted on 08/09/2007 6:06:52 PM PDT by kiriath_jearim

WASHINGTON, DC--(Marketwire - August 8, 2007) - Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld, a leading law firm, is using the collection of founding documents compiled on ConSource, the first comprehensive online collection of Constitution-related source materials, to research and present the District of Columbia's position that the District's handgun ban withstands Constitutional scrutiny. These documents will play an important role in the petition for certiorari presented to the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to overturn the March 9 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit holding that the District's law violates the Second Amendment.

"This case has great implications for gun laws across the country," said Tom Goldstein, the head of Akin Gump's Supreme Court practice. "It is extremely important that we get the constitutional history right. With the help of ConSource, we will be able to access the full documentary record of the Second Amendment in presenting the case to the Supreme Court."

Through ConSource, Akin Gump has access to digitized collections relating to the Second Amendment: the Anti-Federalist Papers, the state ratification debates for seven states, and the legislative history of the Bill of Rights. Online access to these documents will drastically cut the research time necessary to research the case.

"Akin Gump is using this resource in one of many ways we envisioned this project could be used," said Lorianne Updike, President & Executive Director of The Constitutional Sources Project, which is creating ConSource. "Attorneys and practice groups are able to easily find prominent and obscure historical documents relating to different provisions in the Constitution via ConSource, and will soon be able to create their own collections, post briefs, and publish or block access to their practice groups' work product."

ConSource houses more than a thousand of the most important founding documents from over 30 archives across the eastern seaboard, the Midwest, and California, and will soon be adding documents from an archive in France.

To view a full case study regarding Akin Gump and the firm's use of ConSource, visit www.ConSource.org/akingump.

About The Constitutional Sources Project

Founded in May of 2005, The Constitutional Sources Project created the first, comprehensive, online library of Constitution-related source materials and provides free access to "We the People" at www.ConSource.org. Full access to the site and collections will be available on Constitution Day, September 17, 2007. This new medium will give the Founders, Reconstructionists, and original Feminists voices in the classroom and courtroom, providing everyone from the sixth grader to the Supreme Court justice with the best history of the Constitution. Collections include James Madison's Notes of the Constitutional Convention, The Federalist Papers, the Anti- and Pro-Federalist Papers, State Ratification Debates for seven states, the Bill of Rights' Legislative History and 188 personal letters detailing the workings behind-the-scenes during ratification and the passage of the Bill of Rights called the Founders' Papers.

About Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Founded in 1945, Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP, a leading international law firm, numbers more than 900 lawyers with offices in Austin, Beijing, Dallas, Dubai, Houston, London, Los Angeles, Moscow, New York, Philadelphia, San Antonio, San Francisco, Silicon Valley, Taipei and Washington.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Government; US: District of Columbia
KEYWORDS: akingump; banglist; crime; dc; federalistpapers; parker
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-79 next last

1 posted on 08/09/2007 6:06:57 PM PDT by kiriath_jearim
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Congressman Billybob

Ping.


2 posted on 08/09/2007 6:08:40 PM PDT by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kiriath_jearim

So why the press release?

Seems this law firm can only falsify history rather than represent it.

(You also have to be careful with online sources, I remember one case I had where the various online sources actually had different versions of a vital case where a vital paragraph was “edited” except in the orignal reference source.)


3 posted on 08/09/2007 6:19:35 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

seems the firm is more concerned with PR than actually representing their client.


4 posted on 08/09/2007 6:22:32 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kiriath_jearim

“The opinion of the Federalist has always been considered as of great authority. It is a complete commentary on our Constitution, and is appealed to by all parties in the questions to which that instrument has given birth...”
- The U.S. Supreme Court, Cohens v. Virginia (1821).

[note: no mention of the Anti-Federalist]

Also...

“Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice inthe course of a year.” - Federalist Paper 29, Hamilton


5 posted on 08/09/2007 6:22:55 PM PDT by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: kiriath_jearim
If this law firm is representing DC then you know that it’s a collection of fellow travelers.One can certainly count on them citing “international law” many times in the argument.
6 posted on 08/09/2007 6:25:49 PM PDT by Gay State Conservative (If martyrdom is so cool,why does Osama Obama go to such great lengths to avoid it?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RKV

Further note regarding “The Militia Act of 1792” which pretty well lays out that all citizens between 18 and 45 are to own a military grade rifle as part of their membership in the militia...

“each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective States, resident therein, who is or shall be of age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein after excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia, by the Captain or Commanding Officer of the company, within whose bounds such citizen shall reside, and that within twelve months after the passing of this Act. And it shall at all time hereafter be the duty of every such Captain or Commanding Officer of a company, to enroll every such citizen as aforesaid, and also those who shall, from time to time, arrive at the age of 18 years, or being at the age of 18 years, and under the age of 45 years (except as before excepted) shall come to reside within his bounds; and shall without delay notify such citizen of the said enrollment, by the proper non-commissioned Officer of the company, by whom such notice may be proved. That every citizen, so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of power and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and power-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a power of power; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service”


7 posted on 08/09/2007 6:26:26 PM PDT by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RKV

The DC lawyers will that that hamilton quote and say it was to have an ORGANIZED militia NOT individual rights.

You have to ASSEMBLE them in a unit. The lawyers will argue this means we no longer have militias like that there fore there is no individual right.

need better cites.


8 posted on 08/09/2007 6:32:46 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: RKV

“As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow-citizens, the people are confirmed by the next article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.” (introduction to his discussion, and support, of the 2nd Amend) “Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution” Philadelphia Federal Gazette, 18 June 1789, pg.2

ZACHARIA JOHNSON (delegate to Virginia Ratifying Convention): “The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.” (Elliot, 3:645-6)

“Another source of power in government is a military force. But this, to be efficient, must be superior to any force that exists among the people, or which they can command; for otherwise this force would be annihilated, on the first exercise of acts of oppression. Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.” - Noah Webster, An Examination of The Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, Philadelphia, 1787

“False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils, except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm those only who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Can it be supposed that those who have the courage to violate the most sacred laws of humanity, the most important of the code, will respect the less important and arbitrary ones, which can be violated with ease and impunity, and which, if strictly obeyed, would put an end to personal liberty-so dear to men, so dear to the enlightened legislator-and subject innocent persons to all the vexations that the quality alone ought to suffer? Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an unarmed man. They ought to be designated as laws not preventive but fearful of crimes, produced by the tumultuous impression of a few isolated facts, and not by thoughtful consideration of the inconveniences and advantages of a universal decree.” - Thomas Jefferson, quoting 18th century criminologist Cesare Beccaria in “On Crimes and Punishment”, 1764

“Arms in the hands of the citizens may be used at individual discretion for the defense of the country, the overthrow of tyranny or private self-defense.” - John Adams, A Defense of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America, 1787-88

“if the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is no recorse left but the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramont to all forms of positive government.” - Alexander Hamilton, writing in The Federalist Paper No. 28

“The best we can hope for concerning the people at large, is that they be properly armed.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers , 184-8

“...if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist.” - Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers No. 29


9 posted on 08/09/2007 6:34:12 PM PDT by Dead Corpse (What would a free man do?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

Nope. Cites are fine. Note the use of the words “people at large.” No select militia there (e.g. National Guard). Further note ...

“All able bodied men, 17 to 45 of age, are ultimately eligible to be called up into military service and belong to the class known as the Reserve Militia, also known as the unorganized militia. Able bodied men who are not eligible for inclusion in the unorganized militia pool are those aliens not having declared their intent to become citizens of the United States (10 USC 311) and former regular component veterans of the armed forces who have reached the age of 64 (32 USC 313). All female citizens who are members of National Guard units are also included in the unorganized militia pool (10 USC 311).”

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militia_(United_States)#The_reserve_militia.2Funorganized_militia


10 posted on 08/09/2007 6:36:59 PM PDT by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: RKV

you have to look at how the lawyers will twist this.

They will use “enrolled” to show it is a collective right or a duty like jury duty.

This quote is all about how the militia will be organized.

Lawyers twist any ambiguity.


11 posted on 08/09/2007 6:38:21 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RKV

BTW 10 USC 311 is current law of the land. Basically, if you are a male, aged 17-45 your are already legally a member of the militia. Fortunately for us old guys, its a right of the people, not a right of the militia.


12 posted on 08/09/2007 6:39:32 PM PDT by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

Please see my post 12. Not much ambiguity there.


13 posted on 08/09/2007 6:40:12 PM PDT by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RKV

Just being devils advocate because con law professors in law school used to twist those types of quotes in the same way.

Hopefully the advocates for the second amendment will deal with that head on.

Remember the USSC law clerks for the Justices will be those younger fresh legal minds full of mush.


14 posted on 08/09/2007 6:49:57 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: kiriath_jearim

The elites decide that the American people should be disarmed? If so, let’s see them enforce it. There are a hell of a lot of American citizens who will “take issue” with such an attempt, and who “will not go gently into that good night.” There is no surer path to a revolution or a civil war than the attempted disarmament of a free people. Remember Lexington and Concord, 1775. The “shot heard ‘round the world” was the report of a gun fired by a man who wanted to be free.


15 posted on 08/09/2007 6:53:25 PM PDT by ought-six ("Give me liberty, or give me death!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

Fortunately the state of legal scholarship is pretty good with respect to the 2nd Amendment. It wasn’t 20 years ago. Of course our black-robed masters can just do what the hell they want (e.g. emanations and penumbras).

Now if we could only enforce the 9th and 10th Amendments. Oh well...


16 posted on 08/09/2007 7:12:26 PM PDT by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ought-six

Thank you. That is what it comes down to. Force, pure and simple.


17 posted on 08/09/2007 7:13:23 PM PDT by RKV (He who has the guns makes the rules)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: kiriath_jearim; pissant; Jim Robinson; Buckhead; nicmarlo; neverdem; eeevil conservative; ...

Ping.

Also see www.WallBuilders.com for David Barton’s outstanding resources.


18 posted on 08/09/2007 7:26:37 PM PDT by The Spirit Of Allegiance (Public Employees: Honor Your Oaths! Defend the Constitution from Enemies--Foreign and Domestic!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: longtermmemmory

There are ways of throwing this back at into the gun controllers face... Saying that the Second Amendment and the Militia Act of 1792 REQUIRE every able bodied man (and now women) to own a firearm and be trained in the art of war. If I am correct, the law is still on the books.


19 posted on 08/09/2007 7:27:16 PM PDT by Thunder90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Thunder90

The problem is the black robe class of appelate judges tend to be isolated from the real world and in the ivory tower delusional air of the appelate clerks, the research will be results oriented rather than constitutional oriented.


20 posted on 08/09/2007 7:31:48 PM PDT by longtermmemmory (VOTE! http://www.senate.gov and http://www.house.gov)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-79 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson