The Firing Line Forums

Go Back   The Firing Line Forums > The Conference Center > Law and Civil Rights

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old July 29, 2010, 12:19 PM   #26
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
Tennessee, the problem with the Huges amendment, really isn't one of full auto acceptance. It is one of Tax Law. By closing the NFA registry, the Congress has essentially rendered its own revenue making ability, moot.

There are several theories "floating" around on that issue. But before I would broach such, I would want enough other gun cases to be in my favor, so as to dull any full auto scare... Hence getting rid of the remaining AWB's.

But yes, a legislative remedy would be much better than a court mandate. Such a remedy would still be better (and easier) with a lot of case law behind the rights of individuals. That and time. Time to show that the worst (or even all the dire) predictions of the anti-gun crowd haven't materialized.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old July 29, 2010, 12:30 PM   #27
Tennessee Gentleman
Senior Member
 
Join Date: March 31, 2005
Location: Tennessee
Posts: 1,611
Al, I like the revenue angle! Uncle Sugar likes to get money but if I were doing it I would find some bill the Dems (or whomever) REALLY want to pass. Like Financial Regulation and quietly slip in a repeal or whatever of Hughes. Like carry in National Park, the method of passing which I found totally delicious, just use the same method Hughes came about and hoist it on it's own petard?
__________________
"God and the Soldier we adore, in time of trouble but not before. When the danger's past and the wrong been righted, God is forgotten and the Soldier slighted."
Anonymous Soldier.
Tennessee Gentleman is offline  
Old July 29, 2010, 12:53 PM   #28
full.tang.halo
Junior member
 
Join Date: April 16, 2009
Location: Brooksville, FL
Posts: 161
Quote:
It is one of Tax Law. By closing the NFA registry, the Congress has essentially rendered its own revenue making ability, moot.
I didn't think of it in that light Antipitas, they are "giving up" a taxable revenue stream. I know that if we had an open registry, every detachable magazine fed rifle I would buy would have the "select-fire" option box checked. The extra $200 to the gov added onto the price would be well worth being able to have that option available to me.
full.tang.halo is offline  
Old July 29, 2010, 02:24 PM   #29
Webleymkv
Senior Member
 
Join Date: July 20, 2005
Location: Indiana
Posts: 9,925
I could be mistaken (I'm not nearly as well read as some of the other members here), but wasn't the government's argument, which SCOTUS agreed with, in Miller that the NFA was not an outright ban but rather a tax? If so, couldn't the Hughes Amendment be more easily interpreted as an outright ban? Also, given the current court's apparent distaste for purely discretional law (remember, both D.C. and Chicago had registration in place, they just refused to register any handguns), does anyone else think that the CLEO signoff requirement of the NFA might be in danger?
__________________
Smith, and Wesson, and Me. -H. Callahan
Well waddaya know, one buwwet weft! -E. Fudd
All bad precedents begin as justifiable measures. -J. Caesar
Webleymkv is offline  
Old July 29, 2010, 06:54 PM   #30
bob.a
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 15, 2009
Posts: 298
SAF just today brought suit against the state of Maryland to loosen up the terribly restricted "may issue" condition that prevails. It's easier to get a carry permit in NY than in MD.

Here's a link:

http://saf.org/viewpr-new.asp?id=334
bob.a is offline  
Old July 29, 2010, 07:48 PM   #31
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
Thanks bob.a! I've updated the OP with the information.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old July 31, 2010, 04:21 PM   #32
2009_gunner
Junior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2010
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 0
Two other cases you might want to list:

Montana Shooting Sports Association v Holder is sponsored by the SAF to challenge federal regulation of guns made and kept in Montana.
Case info: http://firearmsfreedomact.com/montana-lawsuit-timeline/
Background: http://firearmsfreedomact.com/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montana...ms_Freedom_Act


Wisconsin Carry v Milwaukee to challenge Gun Free School Zones. This case is interesting because Wisconsin is a No-Issue state for CCW, so unlicensed open carry is their only possible method of carry, but to do so is impractical due to GFSZs.
Case info: http://www.wisconsincarry.org/default.html# click "March 12"
2009_gunner is offline  
Old August 1, 2010, 12:24 AM   #33
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
Updated the OP by listing all attorneys for each case.

2009_gunner, The various States Firearms Freedom Acts, are not really 2A cases. They are legislation challenging the current broad definition of the Commerce Clause. The Montana case is one such law that is being litigated in federal court.

The Wisconsin case, is a 2A case. When I have a few more details, I will add it to the list. Thank you for bringing this to my attention.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old August 1, 2010, 01:12 AM   #34
gc70
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 24, 2005
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 2,491
This thread looks like a good candidate for a sticky.
gc70 is offline  
Old August 9, 2010, 11:18 PM   #35
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
I've added the case, Berson v. Milwaukee and I've "stickied" the thread.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old August 10, 2010, 12:00 AM   #36
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
This morning, the Pena case was re-stayed. The ruling is here.

To recap, then: Pena was on hold for the en-banc Nordyke decision, which was on hold for McDonald. McDonald came in. Nordyke was remanded back to the original panel. So the judge in Pena is reconfirming the stay.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old August 10, 2010, 07:56 AM   #37
publius42
Senior Member
 
Join Date: February 9, 2002
Posts: 1,888
Quote:
2009_gunner, The various States Firearms Freedom Acts, are not really 2A cases. They are legislation challenging the current broad definition of the Commerce Clause. The Montana case is one such law that is being litigated in federal court.
Are you sure? I know it's a commerce clause case, but now it's a commerce clause case about guns, and we have a brand new second amendment right to consider. There has never been a constitutional right to homegrown wheat or marijuana or even machine guns (Wickard, Raich, Stewart), so the necessity of infringing on that right to regulate commerce could not be a question.

Now it can.
publius42 is offline  
Old August 10, 2010, 02:12 PM   #38
2009_gunner
Junior Member
 
Join Date: July 31, 2010
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 0
NJ Gun Rationing

It looks like there's a suit in New Jersey against one gun a month, but the I can't find a live link to the actual complaint.

http://www.nraila.org/legislation/read.aspx?id=5310

http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/2010...federal-court/
2009_gunner is offline  
Old August 16, 2010, 09:36 PM   #39
Bartholomew Roberts
Senior Member
 
Join Date: June 12, 2000
Location: Texas and Oklahoma area
Posts: 5,688
Alan Gura, ISRA and SAF filed Ezell v. Chicago today. The suit seeks a preliminary injunction against the Chicago gun range ban and asserts Second and First Amendment claims to run a gun range.

http://www.saf.org/viewpr-new.asp?id=337
Bartholomew Roberts is offline  
Old August 16, 2010, 09:58 PM   #40
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
(Bart just beat me to it!!!) Just finished composing drafts for this, I'll insert the data right after this.

Today, the SAF has filed another lawsuit against Chicago (Alan Gura and David Sigale of McDonald). Challenges the new rules banning gun ranges in the city as violating 1st, 2nd and 14th amendments. Joined in the Lawsuit are Rhonda Ezell, Joseph Brown, William Hespen, Action Target, Inc., Second Amendment Foundation and Illinios State Rifle Association. Alan has sued for a preliminary Injunction against the City enforcing the disputed codes.

The press release is here and the case filings are here.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old August 20, 2010, 09:04 PM   #41
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
Mishaga v. Monken

Illinois requires anyone who possesses a firearm or ammunition to have an FOID (Firearm Owners ID) card. Possession without an FOID is a class 3 felony. The catch here is that you must have an IL drivers license or IL ID card in order to acquire an IL FOID.

Ms. Mishaga is a resident of Ohio who visits friends in IL several times a year. Ms. Mishaga applied for an FOID on March 27, 2010 and again on May 17, 2010. Both times she was denied because she did not have (and cannot legally have) an IL DL or ID card.

Ms. Mishaga is suing to have the IL statutes on FOID overturned as they act as a functional firearms ban, thereby depriving nonresidents their 2A rights, Right to Travel and equal protection. Read more here.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old September 8, 2010, 07:40 PM   #42
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
The NRA has announced the filing of a lawsuit to overturn those sections of 18 U.S.C. § 921 and § 922 (and related CFR's) that prohibit an adult aged 18 to 20 years old from, buying handguns or handgun ammunition from licensed dealers (FFL's).

See the NRA-ILA announcement here.

Finally! It looks to me as if the NRA has rallied around to the attack plan that Alan Gura is using. Remember? this is the 5th Circuit, the first Circuit to proclaim that the 2A is an individual right... And this is Texas. Good plaintiff, good venue.

You can read the complaint here. It is only eight pages and is put together rather well.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old September 10, 2010, 02:09 PM   #43
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
There will be a new round of Oral Arguments for the Nordyke case. This is scheduled for October 19, 2010 at 1:30 PM at the James M. Browning Courthouse in San Francisco.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old September 10, 2010, 03:16 PM   #44
maestro pistolero
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,090
Back to the revenue angle re: the Hughes Amendment. It's not insignificant. It could generate funds in the low billions over a decade.
maestro pistolero is offline  
Old September 18, 2010, 09:24 PM   #45
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
There were a couple of things that happened yesterday.

First, for all intents and purposes, the Nevada case, Baker v. Drozdoff (formerly Baker v. Biaggi), has been settled.

In a joint motion to the Court, all parties to the action have requested a preliminary injunction, enjoining all Nevada State operators from enforcing any of the contested administrative rules and regulations. This, while the Nevada Legislature starts a formal proceeding to change the rules (they have 60 days to start the process). The language is to be amended to remove the infringement of 2A rights.

Congratulations should definitely go to attorney Jim Manley of the Mountain States Legal Foundation and to the Nevada Attorney General's Office for forging an agreement that preserves our rights. You will notice, if you go back to the opening post, the entry is now green (for the win). Would that the other cases go so smoothly!


In the OOIDA v. Lindley case (AB962 - handgun ammo law), the State has filed a motion to dismiss (naturally). The motion appears on its face as a boilerplate memorandum that states no one has standing to sue; no one has suffered a harm; The court doesn't have jurisdiction and in the end, the 11th amendment bars the plaintiffs from suing the State in Federal Court. You can read it here. A hearing is set for 11-18-2010.

The motion even mentions that this case should be stayed until Parker v. California (a State court issue) has been heard.


According to No Lawyers - Only Guns and Money, there are several things happening next week, beginning on Monday.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old September 19, 2010, 01:12 PM   #46
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
After completely reading the MTD in the OOIDA case, I should have made note that CA is asking the court to stay the case, if it won't dismiss the case.

The reasoning? Because Parker v. CA is further along and if that State case is settled, it will affect OOIDA. They included the Parker complaint as an exhibit in their MTD. That was RECAPped and is now viewable. I have edited the OP to give a link to the Parker complaint.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old September 20, 2010, 08:58 PM   #47
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
There's some movement in the Woollard v. Sheridan case (MD). I've linked in the docket, where you can "see" what's going on, in the OP.

Today, on the last day to file a response, Maryland has filed a MTD. They claim that the SAF has no standing (we knew this was coming ) and that Woollard didn't exhaust all States avenues of redress before filing in federal court.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old September 21, 2010, 09:07 PM   #48
Al Norris
Staff
 
Join Date: June 29, 2000
Location: Rupert, Idaho
Posts: 9,318
A Motion for Partial Summary Judgment, Peruta v. County of San Diego (see the OP of the Current 2A cases - Click on the Peruta link to get to the docket and scroll down to the Memo and Points of Authorities) has been filed.

Without going into detail of this motion, I wanted to highlight a specific passage:
Quote:
Plaintiffs cannot obtain the permits that state law requires for concealed carry from the County, nor can they generally carry loaded handguns openly under state law. (SUF 6). In effect, they cannot bear any arms in any practical manner for the core purpose of self-defense. Little more need be said. The County has violated and continues to violate Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment rights, as well as the rights of thousands of similarly situated citizens. And this is true regardless of what type of heightened scrutiny this Court adopts in reviewing the County’s policies and practices. Actually, this Court need not adopt any particular standard of review for, as in Heller, the severity of the County’s restrictive policy and practices renders them void under any level of heightened scrutiny.
Note the part I highlighted. This is a recurring theme in many of the suits. What is being said, is that the law, as implemented, is so bad, that the court (like Heller & McDonald) does not have to decide any level of scrutiny, because the law wouldn't pass the strictest scrutiny, let alone any lower level.

After stating this, most of the suits go immediately to strict scrutiny in their arguments, as does this one.

I could go back, quote and highlight each and every like passage in most all of the 22 complaints. They are there. The major theme: The laws are so invasive as to fail any level of judicial scrutiny, therefore, the court need not decide what level at this time. But if the court should feel the need to decide, then strict scrutiny because ...

I first noticed this in Alan Gura's earlier case writings. This strategy has been "picked up" by the other attorneys involved in these suits. Yes, they are all communicating and cooperating with each other.
__________________
National listings of the Current 2A Cases.
Al Norris is offline  
Old September 22, 2010, 01:21 AM   #49
maestro pistolero
Senior Member
 
Join Date: August 16, 2007
Posts: 2,090
This thread is a great resource for all the current 2A cases underway. I am unaware of a more comprehensive log anywhere on the net. Thanks, Al
maestro pistolero is offline  
Old September 22, 2010, 08:41 AM   #50
CowTowner
Senior Member
 
Join Date: October 17, 2007
Location: Cowtown of course!
Posts: 1,199
What maestro pistolero said. Thanks for staying on top of all of this Al.
__________________
NRA Chief Range Safety Officer, Home Firearm Safety and Pistol Instructor
"There are three classes of people: those who see, those who see when they are shown, those who do not see."
Leonardo da Vinci
CowTowner is offline  
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:55 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site and contents, including all posts, Copyright © 1998-2014 S.W.A.T. Magazine
Copyright Complaints: Please direct DMCA Takedown Notices to the registered agent: thefiringline.com
Contact Us
Page generated in 0.17344 seconds with 8 queries