McDonald v Chicago update

[legaleagle_45]

Order from SCOTUS yesterday granting the motion of the NRA to divide argument:

08-1521 McDONALD, OTIS, ET AL. V. CHICAGO, IL, ET AL.

The motion of Texas, et al. for leave to participate in oral argument as amici curiae and for divided argument is denied. the motion of respondents National Rifle Association, Inc., et al. for divided argument is granted. The motion of Law Professor and Students for leave to file a brief as amici curiae is granted.

Gura opposed the NRA motion, but supported the Texas motion. The NRA was concerned that Gura was placing too much emphasis on the P or I angle and not enough on the substantive due process angle....

The NRA has made an interesting choice for counsel to do oral argument... former Solicitor General Paul Clement. You might recall thay Clement also handled oral argument in Heller on behalf of the US government. The argument presented by Clement in Heller basically asserted that, while the 2nd protects an individual right, the ruling by the Court of Appeals was overbroad and that the matter should be returned to the lower court for a determination whether a handgun ban infringes the 2nd amend in light of the availability of long arms.

Some of Clement's statement in oral argument in Heller may come back to haunt him at oral argument in McDonald.

 

[husbandofaromanian]

I bet the current administration holds back on an "assault weapons ban" until this case gets decided. That's about the only way they can figure out what evil features make a boring semi-auto rifle an "ASSAULT RIFLE" that they can get away with. The evil pistol grip was one of my favorites from the last ban. How many people have we lost in gun violence due to that awful pistol grip on rifles.

 

[Phatty]

I bet the current administration holds back on an "assault weapons ban" until this case gets decided.

The November elections are a much bigger motivator to keep quiet on the guns front.

 

[Art Eatman]

Being discussed at length in the "NRA Steals..." thread.