To recap what's going on at the moment.
There were two cases that comprised what is being called, NRA v. Chicago.
The first case was filed immediately that Heller was decided by Alan Gura, for Otis McDonald, et al.
The second case was filed two days later by the NRA.
The cases were combined at the District Court and summary judgment to dismiss was granted. The cases were appealed to the 7th Circuit where, on June 2, 2009, the Circuit declined to incorporate and held for the District Court.
The NRA filed its petition for certiorari on June 4th and Gura filed his on June 11th. On June 25th, an order extending time to file a response was entered for Chicago. Response is due on Aug. 5th.
There are currently 7 amici curiae briefs filed for the petitioners, arguing for a grant of cert, for which I have links.
Briefs filed on behalf of both litigants:
Brief amicus curiae of
Arms Keepers.
Brief amicus curiae of
California (AG Jerry Brown).
Brief amici curiae of
Texas, et al (33 States).
Brief amici curiae of
Institute for Justice, and Cato Institute.
Brief amicus curiae of
Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation.
Briefs filed on behalf of the NRA:
Brief amicus curiae of
American Civil Rights Union.
Briefs filed on behalf of McDonald:
The Brief amicus curiae of
Constitutional Accountability Center (Law Professors).
Note: There are 2 other cert stage briefs, that I could not find links to. One is a brief (I assume) for the NRA by the National Shooting Sports Foundation and the other is a brief by State Firearm Associations (again, I presume for the NRA). Should anyone find the links, I would appreciate it, by dropping a note in this thread.
A third case, which was decided by the 2nd Circuit on Jan. 28, 2009 was filed by James Maloney on June 29th (extension of time to file granted by Justice Ginsburg).
All three cases (McDonald and the NRA cases are asking separate questions) are being petitioned for incorporation of the 2nd amendment, against the States, on Due process and/or the P&I clause of the 14th amendment.
The cases in Chicago present the Court with a ban on unregistered handguns and rifles, somewhat similar to that of D.C. It goes further in the nature of the bans. Should a citizens fail to re-register their firearm(s) (an annual requirement), then said firearm may never again be allowed to be registered. No handguns are allowed to be registered after a certain date (like the D.C. prohibition). Certain exceptions are made in the law for those moving into the city, but registration must take place before possession is allowed.
All Firearms must be registered prior to possession, no exceptions.
In addition to the above, Illinois law states that all firearms owners must complete and be issued a Firearms Owners IDentification certificate (FOID), prior to possessing any firearm. This also must be renewed each year. Each and every firearm owned, must be listed on your FOID. Possession of a firearms other than what is listed is a felony.
The Federal Civilian Marksmanship Program (CMP) allows qualified US citizens to purchase certain surplus military firearms (M1 Garands; M1 Carbines) for participation in marksmanship programs. Here the Federal government will ship the qualified firearm directly to the owner. However, Chicago law says the firearm must be registered before taking possession. Can not be lawfully done, as you simply will not know the serial number of the rifle before it is shipped. Thus making you an instant felon. Added to this, because you took possession, before registration, assuming you immediately transported the long-gun out of Chicago's environs, you will never be allowed to register that rifle. Catch-22.
Despite all of this, Chicago remains a haven for guns. Unlawfully possessed by the gangs roaming the streets, against which the citizens have no protection.
While the former two cases are direct "gun" cases, Maloney differs in that the object was a prohibited, but less than lethal defensive weapon, "discovered" in his home, after a less than credible search by the police. No firearms, or other weapons charges were ever brought to trail, so the search incident to the discovery was never addressed. A plea bargain for misdemeanor disorderly conduct was entered.
There is much about Maloney that never came to light, in the press, and has subsequently colored many peoples opinions (for or against).
Maloney is interesting because, if not addressed by the Supreme Court, then the States can prohibit its citizens from possessing less than lethal defensive weapons, while maintaining the right to keep lethal weapons for home defense. This alone, severely limits any lawful response a citizen may make in any defensive situation, while in his own home, to that of a solely lethal response.
Then we have the 9th Circuit (Nordyke v King) who, as of this moment, has incorporated, but maintained the county law precluding firearms from county property (the panel determined that the county fairgrounds were a "sensitive place," per dicta in
Heller).
Of all the arguments for incorporation (regardless of the "other" issues involved), the cert brief by Alan Gura is by far the best argument to grant the petition. It is, in short, simply stunning in clarity and brilliant in its logic. Should you wish to read it, you may find it
here.
There is a clear difference between the NRA petition and the McDonald petition. Once again, the NRA is tossing a plate of spaghetti against the wall, to see what sticks (not a real criticism, as many attorneys do this), whereas McDonald gives due deference to the Court in its selective incorporation methods, but is primarily concerned with the
Slaughterhouse Cases and how the P&I clause has been interpreted (or not). Gura is calling for the Court to revisit that decision and makes a compelling case. IMO.
What is clear to this "reporter," is that there is a split in the circuits and the need for some direction from the Supreme Court is at hand. Sooner, rather than later.