Skip to comments.The Supreme Court Takes on Guns, Again - Heller lawyer Alan Gura revived the Second Amendment...
Posted on 10/02/2009 9:12:53 PM PDT by neverdem
Heller lawyer Alan Gura revived the Second Amendment. Can he do the same for the 14th?
It has been only a year and a season since the Supreme Court shook the world of Second Amendment jurisprudence with the historical D.C. v. Heller decision. In that case, the court declared for the first time that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to bear arms against infringement by the federal government at least commonly used arms, for self-defense in the home.
Heller opened the gates for a flood of new lawsuits by gun-rights friendly attorneys and organizations, most prominently the National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment Foundation. One of those cases, McDonald v. Chicago, challenging a gun ban in Chicago that's similar in most respects to the D.C. gun laws overturned in Heller, has just been taken up by the Supreme Court.
The counsel who will be arguing McDonald before the court in early 2010 is the same man who won Heller, Alan Gura. Although McDonald's challenge to Chicago's laws has so far lost at both the district court level and at the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, Gura is confident he'll win.
The Chicago laws at issue are as significant a violation of a citizen's right to bear arms as were D.C.'s. Chicago residents can't have a gun without registration, can't register handguns, can't register a gun that's already in their possession, and if they miss a yearly deadline to re-register, that weapon becomes forever unregisterable. Gura and the Second Amendment Foundation (with the Illinois State Rifle Association) have pulled together a set of plaintiffs with personal tales of having their quality of life lessened by the gun ban...
(Excerpt) Read more at reason.com ...
Or, will the wise Latina go up them stairs for some justice.
Gura, who hopes to raise the clause from the grave with his McDonald arguments, thinks possible misuse of the doctrine is no reason not to embrace it where it's appropriate. "If the Privileges or Immunities Clause guarantees certain unenumerated rights and those rights are violated, then great, have those rights vindicated! But if people file unmeritorious litigation [using Privileges or Immunities Clause arguments] that that litigation will not succeed, the courts will do their job, and that wave of misguided litigation will subside," he says. "A fear that people will try incorrect things [inspired by a revived Privileges or Immunities Clause] is not a reason to keep interpreting it the wrong way today."
Gura may be shooting for the moon in asking the Supreme Court to finally knock down Slaughterhouse after all these years. Fortunately, victory for him and the citizens of Chicago does not depend on this risky strategy. He's leaving room in his arguments for the court to decide in his favor through the means they've used to selectively incorporate the Bill of Rights since the premature death of the Privileges or Immunities Clausethe Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment, which has come to mean not merely the procedures used by government but "substantive" due process as well.
In the third link you find:
At issue is a 27-year-old Chicago law banning handguns, requiring the annual taxation of firearms, and otherwise interfering with the right of law-abiding individuals to keep guns at home for self-defense.
Some noteworthy articles about politics, foreign or military affairs, IMHO, FReepmail me if you want on or off my list.
If Chicago bans firearms (the modern "arms") Chicago effectively diminishes the ability of law-abiding individuals to defend themselves against marauders.
Consequently law-abiding people RELOCATE to other places where Chicago's law doesn't prevail.
Marauders, recognizing that everyone's right to self-defense has been diminished to some degree, RELOCATE to Chicago.
The data should show that Chicago's crime rate has increased.
"Imagine a law requiring an annual fee for voting privileges."
Thanks for reminding me. Don't hang all the lawyers. Keep the good ones like Alan Gura!
Thanks for the ping!
Be Ever Vigilant!
I can, and you'll probably get a slight increase in taxes when you vote for the wrong party.
Or having to pass a NICS check at the polling place before being given a ballot. If it comes back delayed you can’t vote for 3 days, or until it is cleared.