DC fires its lead attorney in the Heller case.

[highorder]

"In addition to needing a good lawyer and appellate advocate, you need someone who has immersed himself in very complex historical sources. Alan has been doing that for two or three months by now.

months, eh? funny, everyone who understands the context of the issue (and easily recognizes the individual right) has studied for years.

 

[Superlite27]

Well, The written brief was already finished. The man's arguement is on paper and submitted. Now that the heavy lifting is out of the way, the mayor's good buddy can appoint one of his friends to do all the talking.

I don't think it changes anything. The guy who left was strictly anti, or else he wouldn't be writing the city's arguement. But, it's already submitted. Now is just the oral wrangling.

Who knows? The change of scenery might be a bonus for us if the new appointee is a moron and doesn't have their ducks in a row. I doubt they can be more anti than what D.C. had before. They might even be less of an anti, which is still a bonus for us.

This is a good thing.

 

[JohnBT]

"Still, it's good to see the bad guys having trouble getting their act straight."

Now, now, no fair laughing at the hopelessly incompetent. After all, this is the bunch that does things, stupid things, day in and day out year after year. Let's see, what did I just read in the Post about the new boilers in the schools failing?
_______________

"The Army Corps of Engineers came to the District in the late 1990s on an expensive mission: launch a massive overhaul of decrepit school buildings, which eventually included spending $80 million to replace ancient heating systems with brand-new boilers to last 25 years or more.

Since then, 40 of the 55 renovated heating systems have broken down or needed major repair. Public schools officials failed to maintain the new equipment, leading to problems such as damage from mineral deposits that built up because the water was not properly treated, repair records and interviews show.

At Spingarn Senior High School in Northeast, the Corps put in four new boilers and pipe work in 2001 for about $3.9 million, records show. The units now sit in pools of rusty water, beyond repair.

Administrators had to sink more than $10 million into emergency repairs this year alone, prompted by cold classrooms at 71 schools in February that displaced hundreds of children."

www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123002242.html?hpid=topnews

By David S. Fallis, V. Dion Haynes and Dan Keating
Washington Post Staff Writers
Monday, December 31, 2007; Page A01
_________________

 

[Superlite27]

Let's see, what did I just read in the Post about the new boilers in the schools failing

?

There's such a thing as a "new" boiler?

Isn't that sort of like a "new" flintlock? Or a "new" telegraph machine?

 

[AZTOY]

What are the odds that Nickles will step up and argue the case himself?

 

[TexasRifleman]

There's such a thing as a "new" boiler?

Isn't that sort of like a "new" flintlock? Or a "new" telegraph machine?

Tells you a lot about the forward thinking, progressive government in DC eh?

 

[Socrates]

An incoming AG often fires the old crew. The demos tried to make a big thing of this when Bush's guy did the same.

I'm glad politics will weaken their presentation.

Supreme Court gives you a date, brief has to be in, period.

Sure would like to know the questions they asked, or consider key issues.

We all maybe singing in the wind, since a ruling in Washington D.C. may not apply to the states, due to Washington's status as being under Federal Law. It will be intresting to see how this affects the massive amount of Federal Regulation on firearms, something the second amendment clearly intended to stop.

Problem with the Supreme Court is they often have their own position, and try and make up a logical argument to justify their views.

Pray that doesn't happen here.

 

[4v50 Gary]

I think the oral arguments only go so far. It's what has been submitted on paper with all the legal citations that the court will take note of and rely on in reaching and writing their decision.

 

[Deanimator]

I think the oral arguments only go so far. It's what has been submitted on paper with all the legal citations that the court will take note of and rely on in reaching and writing their decision.

I think that if you've got a solid brief and a crappy presentation, they might cut you some slack. If you've got a crappy brief (which they are virtually guaranteed to) and a crappy presentation, you might not just lose, you might be publicly humiliated before the court, which has happened.

 

[Socrates]

More likely they already had their minds made up what they wanted to say when they accepted the case.

I gather the procedure is they read the briefs prior, write a list of questions, and then enjoy grilling the attorneys. I've watched the California Supreme Court in action, and took a class from the lead research attorney for ex-justice Janice Brown, Susan Sola. Her husband at the time was a good friend, and Dean of our law school, Mike Guarino.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janice_Rogers_Brown

Ms. Brown hired one of my classmates right out of law school to work as an assistant research attorney, for Ms. Brown.

The irony is the research attorney, and the woman they hired are just beyond liberals...

 

[paramedic70002]

Is it too late for DC to withdraw the question? That would be sweet if they went in to lose.

 

[leadcounsel]

My 2 cents...

He's likely fired because he's submitted the same losing argument from the District Ct.

This is good... you don't generally fire someone who's doing a great job. Unless they have a ringer waiting in the wings, which is a scary thought, this is great for the 2A. Their team, and argument, are falling from within.

The 2A has logic, history, drafter's intent, and now the other team is falling apart... all on our side.

 

[Hypnogator]

He was probably fired because he told them they were wasting their time

Most likely just the opposite. Heretofore, DC's arguments have been inadequate to the point of being moronic. I think that's led to a reassessment of the competence of the DC legal team, with the predictable results.

I'm betting they're desperately searching for some golden-tongued litigator who can make a silk purse out of a sow's ear.

 

[AZTOY]

This is good... you don't generally fire someone who's doing a great job. Unless they have a ringer waiting in the wings

Nickles could be the ringer!!



Covington’s Peter Named General Counsel to DC Mayor-Elect Adrian Fenty

11/09/2006
WASHINGTON, DC, November 9, 2006 — Peter Nickles, highly regarded partner and now senior counsel at Covington & Burling LLP, has been appointed General Counsel and Senior Advisor to newly elected DC Mayor Adrian Fenty. Mr. Nickles will assume his new position in early 2007.

At Covington, Mr. Nickles’ practice emphasizes major class actions involving securities fraud and toxic torts; jury and non-jury trials; defensive takeover litigation and other high-profile litigation; international arbitrations; as well as antitrust and trade law and federal regulatory practice. Over the last four and one-half decades, he has also represented numerous Fortune 500 companies against insurance carriers in complex insurance coverage disputes.

Mr. Nickles has fought for the rights of poor and disadvantaged persons through social, institutional, and political reform throughout his career. His commitment to public service dates back to his early days as a lawyer, when he was counsel to the Jackson State Task Force and the Kent State Task Force, reporting to the Scranton Commission on Campus Unrest. From 1970 to 1975, he chaired Covington’s program at Neighborhood Legal Services Program (NLSP) in Washington, DC. He was an adjunct professor at Howard Law School from 1980 to 1992.

Mr. Nickles has litigated important cases to protect the rights of the District’s most marginalized citizens. As class counsel in Dixon v. Barry, filed in 1974, he helped secure significant relief for thousands of homeless and mentally retarded residents of the District of Columbia. This case, which required nearly 30 years of litigation, resulted in the creation of community-based services for persons with mental illness.

Mr. Nickles has also been involved in several cases that have been instrumental in reducing violence, alleviating overcrowding, and improving Medicaid and mental health services for prisoners in the District of Columbia. In Twelve John Does v. District of Columbia and in John Doe v. District of Columbia, he was appointed by the United States District Court to represent all of the prisoners confined to the District of Columbia’s Central and Maximum Security Facilities regarding a plethora of unconstitutional conditions. In Inmates of the Modular Facility v. District of Columbia, he skillfully negotiated an effective Consent Decree designed to cure constitutional deficiencies in security, health care, sanitation, and fire safety. In Woman Prisoners v. District of Columbia, class-action litigation brought on behalf of the District’s women prisoners, he won an injunction requiring the District of Columbia to provide adequate reproductive health care, to take steps to prevent sexual abuse, harassment, and other relief.

In May 1998, he received the District of Columbia Bar Association’s Pro Bono Service Award for his years of public service in connection with a number of cases affecting the citizens of the District of Columbia.

http://www.cov.com/news/detail.aspx?news=1168

 

[ArmedBear]

Nickles is a leveraged ambulance chaser, i.e. class action plaintiff's lawyer.

Not much to do with this case, no matter how good he may be at winning himself -- oops, his clients -- a bunch of money.

 

[Langenator]

Yep. Miller died if I remember right.

From commentor Kazinski (don't think it's Judge Alex, but it's possible) on the post on this topic at The Volokh Conspiracy:

according to the timeline, oral arguments were heard March 30, 1939, Miller was shot to death April 4, 1939, the decision was handed down May 15, 1939.

Miller was alive, but not present of course, for the hearing, and was indeed dead when the decision was handed down. If the government hadn't confiscated his sawed off shotgun, he may have been able to survive at least until the decision was handed down.

Our very own Geekwitha.45 has more on the shenanigans of Miller in another comment to the same post.

 

[leadcounsel]

I find it ironic that Nickles, who spent his career helping the poor and disenfranchised, is going to argue AGAINST individual gun rights - which are arguable the BEST tool of the poor and disenfranchised throughout history!

 

[Markbo]

Helping the poor and disengranchised????

No offense, but that is a remarkably naive statement. He has made a career of not of helping the poor.... but of making money. And lots of it. Money, Egos, Power. Helping the poor?

Please. Look to your local soup kitchens and meals on wheels and maybe some ex atheletes building parks and basketball courts for helping the poor. The attorney's are in it for the money.

 

[TexasRifleman]

helping the poor and disenfranchised

Is THAT how we describe ambulance chasers now?

 

[Baba Louie]

The Post continues to update their internet article...

By David Nakamura
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, January 3, 2008; Page B01

Acting D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles has fired the city lawyer who had been preparing to defend the District's longtime ban on handguns before the Supreme Court this spring, a move that some city officials fear could harm the case.

Alan B. Morrison, who has argued 20 cases before the high court, was asked to leave his post as special counsel by the end of this week. Morrison had been hired by then-Attorney General Linda Singer and put in charge of arguing the handgun case. Singer resigned two weeks ago.

Nickles declined to elaborate on his decision, but Morrison suggested in an interview that he was fired as part of a feud between Nickles and Singer.

The case is one of the most important in the city's history, and the court's ruling could have a national impact, legal experts have said. The city appealed to the Supreme Court to maintain the handgun ban after a lower court overturned it in the spring. The high court agreed to hear the case, probably in March, which would mark the first time the Supreme Court has examined a Second Amendment case in nearly 70 years.

Morrison had taken an active part, along with a team of lawyers from the city and two private firms, in writing a 15,000-word brief that is scheduled to be filed with the Supreme Court tomorrow. In recent weeks, Morrison led a practice run -- known as a moot court -- through the oral arguments he planned to make in the courtroom. During typical high court hearings, each side has 30 minutes to present its case while being peppered by questions from the justices.

Nickles said yesterday that he will announce a replacement for Morrison in the next 10 days. He said the team of lawyers who had been working with Morrison -- including D.C. Solicitor General Todd Kim, Thomas C. Goldstein of Akin Gump and Walter E. Dellinger of O'Melveny & Myers -- would remain on the case. Goldstein has argued 17 Supreme Court cases, and Dellinger was acting U.S. solicitor general during the high court's 1996-97 term.

Nickles said in a recent interview that he admires Robert Long, a former colleague at Covington & Burling who has argued 14 Supreme Court cases.

"The brief we are submitting is a fabulous brief, a winning brief by a great team," Nickles said. "We will not miss a step. . . . Alan is a very good lawyer, but I decided to move in a different direction. It's not as if one person is indispensable."

Nickles met with Morrison on Dec. 21, shortly after Singer's resignation. But Morrison said he did not learn that he was fired until Friday, when he received an e-mail from Deputy Attorney General Eugene A. Adams.

D.C. Council member Phil Mendelson (D-At Large), chairman of the Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary, which oversees the attorney general's office, said that he spoke with Nickles about the handgun case Tuesday but that Nickles said nothing about the firing.

"It's like committing hari-kari. We're in the middle of preparing for a Supreme Court case," Mendelson said, adding that he has heard "nothing but praise" for Morrison's work on the brief.

Morrison suggested yesterday that Nickles was interested in purging the attorney general's office of Singer's allies. Singer had indicated frustration that Mayor Adrian M. Fenty (D) relied more heavily on Nickles, who had been his general counsel, to make key legal decisions. Upon Singer's resignation, Fenty replaced her with Nickles, a former corporate litigator and friend of Fenty's family.

Describing their meeting, Morrison said Nickles asked him whether he "was part of a campaign" to discredit the Fenty administration in the news media after Singer's resignation.

"He hadn't made up his mind who would argue" the Supreme Court case, Morrison said, "but told me it was automatically disqualifying if I was part of a campaign."

Singer's chief of staff, Betsy Miller, and her spokeswoman, Melissa Merz, have resigned.

Nickles said Morrison's account of their meeting was "inaccurate." In a statement, Fenty praised Nickles but declined to address specifics about Morrison's firing.

"Peter Nickles' expertise in litigation is going to greatly benefit residents of the District of Columbia in our handgun case pending before the Supreme Court," Fenty said. "It is important that he move quickly to build a team and a strategy to maximize our chances of winning this important case."

But David C. Vladeck, a professor at Georgetown University Law School, said Morrison's departure would be a major blow to the case.

"This is a case that requires an unusual amount of preparation because one of the issues comes back to, 'What did those folks who wrote the Bill of Rights really mean when they wrote the Second Amendment?' " said Vladeck, who is friends with Morrison. "In addition to needing a good lawyer and appellate advocate, you need someone who has immersed himself in very complex historical sources. Alan has been doing that for two or three months by now. Whoever takes over this case will start many, many, many laps behind where we ought to be."

60 comments as of right now, some quite astute.
Caption under today's photo reads...

Acting D.C. Attorney General Peter Nickles, left, shown with Mayor Adrian M. Fenty, said he wants to move the gun ban defense in a different direction.

I'm wondering what direction and how his oral will differ from Morrison's printed brief.