In NRA, et al v. BATFE et al, currently at the 5th Circuit, we've had the opening brief here
and an Amicus brief, by the NSSF, here
We've now had the response from the Government, and an amicus from the Brady bunch and the reply brief from the NRA.
The governments argument is simple, perhaps too simple:
- Plaintiffs Lack Standing To Bring This Suit
- The 18-to-20-Year-Old Plaintiffs Have Failed To Establish That They Cannot Lawfully Obtain Handguns and Handgun Ammunition For Use In
- The Federal Firearms Licensee Plaintiffs Lack Standing To Challenge The Federal Laws On Behalf of Persons Aged 18 To 20 Years Old
- Plaintiffs’ Claims Fail On The Merits
- The Challenged Federal Laws Do Not Burden Conduct Protected By The Second Amendment
- Restrictions On The Commercial Sale Of Firearms To Persons Under 21 Comport With Historical Understandings Of The Second Amendment Right
- Federal And State Militia Laws Did Not Create a Vested Right To Purchase Arms For Individuals Aged 18 to 21
- Even If Plaintiffs’ Suit Implicates Their Second Amendment Rights, The Challenged Federal Laws Are Constitutional
- At Most This Court Should Apply Intermediate Scrutiny
- The Challenged Federal Laws Satisfy Intermediate Scrutiny
- The Challenged Federal Laws Do Not Violate Plaintiffs’ Rights To Equal Protection
A long read, but it is instructive as to how the Brady's, the VPC and Handgun Control Inc. (the prior Brady name) began to assemble their distorted facts - straight from the mouth of our dear government.
The Brady brief is the usual whining about how the sky will fall if "children" get their hands on guns, conveniently forgetting the gangbangers who already possess multitudes of firearms.