Quantcast
  1. Upgrade efforts paused for now. Thanks for your patience. More details in the thread in Tech Support for those who are interested.
    Dismiss Notice

Petitioner's brief filed in McDonald v. Chicago

Discussion in 'Legal' started by freonr22, Nov 16, 2009.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. freonr22

    freonr22 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    Messages:
    118
  2. armoredman

    armoredman Member

    Joined:
    Nov 19, 2003
    Messages:
    18,372
    Location:
    proud to be in AZ
    And with that simple question a world began shaking.
     
  3. freonr22

    freonr22 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    Messages:
    118
    eloquently said
     
  4. Phatty

    Phatty Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    701
    Location:
    Southern Illinois
    I just finished reading the brief. It's really, really good.

    The NRA's brief is also due today. Does anyone have a link to that brief?
     
  5. damien

    damien Member

    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2007
    Messages:
    1,212
    Location:
    Northern IL, USA
    So where is the bad guy's brief?
     
  6. Phatty

    Phatty Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    701
    Location:
    Southern Illinois
    If by "bad guy" you mean Chicago, its brief is due on December 30. But maybe by "bad guy" you mean the Brady Center, who is filing an amici brief next week.
     
  7. Al Norris

    Al Norris Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    570
    Location:
    Rupert, ID.
    If the NRA is filing a brief, it will be as an amicus (Friend of the Court).

    The case of NRA v. Chicago (#08-4241 and #08-4243) was not granted cert. The McDonald case is seperate, and is being funded by the SAF and the ISRA.
     
  8. legaleagle_45

    legaleagle_45 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    834
    Not according to Alan Gura:

    http://www.chicagoguncase.com/2009/11/12/monday-monday-monday/

    It appears that Alan's brief is 80% P or I argument. I would expect that there has been some coordination with the NRA and that the NRA brief will be primarily directed towards the substantive due process portion of the argument.

    Another matter of note... based upon the foregoing, it would appear that we will also have two reply briefs, one by Alan and one by the NRA both due January 29. This will allow our side to more fully attack both the Chicago brief and their amicii.
     
  9. Phatty

    Phatty Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    701
    Location:
    Southern Illinois
    According to www.chicagoguncase.com, because the NRA case and McDonald case were consolidated for purposes of appeal in the 7th Circuit, the NRA is considered a party to the McDonald case and has the right to file a respondant's brief. If a respondant does not oppose the petitioner (which is the case with the NRA), then their brief is due at the same time as the petitioner's brief.

    The "Monday, Monday, Monday!!!" entry dated November 12 on www.chicagoguncase.com explains this in more detail.

    Edit: legaleagle, you beat me to it.
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2009
  10. Al Norris

    Al Norris Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    570
    Location:
    Rupert, ID.
    Thanks legaleagle. I should probably review the Court rules again....
     
  11. legaleagle_45

    legaleagle_45 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    834
    That is what leagaleagles do...

    :neener:
     
  12. Phatty

    Phatty Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    701
    Location:
    Southern Illinois
    I thought the same thing after reading Gura's brief. Even if there was no coordination, it would have been safe for Gura to assume that the NRA's brief would exhaustively cover the due process incorporation arguments since that was the NRA's approach in the lower courts. I haven't heard anything at all about the NRA filing a brief yesterday, but I am assuming they did. Have you heard anything?
     
  13. legaleagle_45

    legaleagle_45 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    834
    The take on Alan's brief from the folks over at Scotusblog:

    More at:

    http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/history-lesson-on-2nd-amendments-reach/#more-12985
     
  14. legaleagle_45

    legaleagle_45 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    834
    There is coordination... in fact there is coordination between most of the amici supporting Alan as well. I know that for a fact. How I know that is confidential.

    Not a word, but I will keep checking my sources... As soon as I find out anything, I will post it.
     
  15. freonr22

    freonr22 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    Messages:
    118
  16. everallm

    everallm Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,504
  17. legaleagle_45

    legaleagle_45 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    834
    Primarily a substantive due process argument.
     
  18. green-grizzly

    green-grizzly Member

    Joined:
    Jan 12, 2008
    Messages:
    181
    I thought the NRA brief was excellent. I like how it first shows that the application of the right to keep arms is necessary given the history; the real question is what legal theory to use. It gives the justices three ways to rule in our favor, and presents them in the order of the likelihood that the court would probably adopt them.

    Gura's wild swing and the NRA conservative approach is a classic one-two punch. This has worked out very well.

    It seems like Gura and the NRA's attorney's have been working closely together, given how the NRA's argument about overruling Slaughterhouse (blessed be the day!) basically says "see petitioner's brief."

    You can see that Gura's agenda is much broader than the NRAs. Gura wants the privileges and immunities clause resurrected; the NRA only wants the RKBA applied to states. Gura had much more limited aims in Heller (remembers all the concessions he made at oral argument?), but he is really going for broke now.

    I'm glad the NRA is along. For these Cato guys, Second Amendment litigation is a means to an end. For the NRA, the Second Amendment is the end. Well, that and sending out mailings.;)

    Or perhaps Gura is being more tactical than I give him credit for, and he is trying to get votes from the liberal wing?
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2009
  19. everallm

    everallm Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,504
    Based on the chatter on various legal boards, Gura's approach is generally believed to be calculated to appeal to more of the "liberal" wing of the SC than a straight 2A incorporation case would.

    The whole P+I element of the 14th Amendment has huge potential knock on effects well outside of the realm of 2A in what would generally be. Everything from GLBT rights through the legal fiction of a corporation as a person.

    It will be interested to see who else files amicus briefs
     
  20. legaleagle_45

    legaleagle_45 Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2007
    Messages:
    834
    Correct. I know of at least one otherwise very liberal instituion which will be filing an amicus brief in support of this approach.
     
  21. Phatty

    Phatty Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    701
    Location:
    Southern Illinois
    I'm not seeing this and I would be happy if somebody could flesh this idea out some more. The way I view the current state of the law, the Supreme Court has pretty much accomplished everything the P or I clause was meant to accomplish through the use of the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. So, the court had to get cute and use a different clause to accomplish the original purpose of the Amendment, but I don't see how the practical effect has been any different (in the long run).

    Regarding liberals, what is it about the P or I clause that would give them more than they can get from the due process clause?
     
  22. everallm

    everallm Member

    Joined:
    Jun 6, 2007
    Messages:
    1,504
    Err, P+I was gutted by Slaughterhouse, pardon the pun

    As an example, 2A has been held not to apply against the states 'cause of the neutering of the 14th.
     
    Last edited: Nov 17, 2009
  23. Phatty

    Phatty Member

    Joined:
    Apr 2, 2009
    Messages:
    701
    Location:
    Southern Illinois
    Yeah, that was in the 19th century prior to the development of the due process incorporation route and doesn't answer my question. What do the liberals think the P or I clause gets them that they would not be able to get under the due process clause and why?
     
  24. freonr22

    freonr22 Member

    Joined:
    Nov 3, 2008
    Messages:
    118
  25. Al Norris

    Al Norris Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2002
    Messages:
    570
    Location:
    Rupert, ID.
    Here are the amicus briefs that are available as of right now:
    More will be coming in by end of the court day on Monday, the 23rd.

    You might want to keep checking the ABA.org for the next few days after that. They are notoriously slow at making them available, if there are more than a very few (remember Heller?).
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice