Gura's reply brief

Status
Not open for further replies.
I haven't read it yet, but I'm curious if there was mention of the INTENT of the ILLINOIS constitution, which is a paper tiger in practice...
Click to expand...

A non issue in the case and therefore not mentioned in either of the briefs.
 
I think it is obvious that Gura did not need or want the NRA medaling in McDonald v Chicago. He did well with DC v Heller in spite of the NRA. I saw on the GOA site that they had also filled a brief in McDonald v Chicago. Does anyone know or care to speculate if Gura wanted The GOA to get involved? I'm just curious. There is a lot at stake here and it seems to me too many people are getting involved.
Thanks
Eugene

BTW: LeagleEagle I love the graph.
 
Last edited:
Gun Owners of America filed an amicus, friend of the court brief. This simply supplements Gura's brief. I don't think it really makes a difference. It presents a slightly different twist on arguments already made, based on my quick scan. Most organizations file them to look good for their members, but the court rarely cares about at them. The court will look at the ones filed by the fed gov, or if the group that files it presents an unusual perspective (i.e. police firearms instructors), but I doubt the GOA brief will come up.

The NRA is a co-petitioner, since their case was merged on appeal in the 7th cir., however their case was not selected by SCOTUS, Gura's was. This allowed them to hijack 1/3 of Gura's oral argument time.

Gura is pissed that the NRA tries to hijack every case he brings (Including Heller). GOA didn't do anything close to this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top