ChicagoGunCase.com

Today we filed our petition to the Supreme Court.

Yesterday the Seventh Circuit announced its decision in our case.

It wasn’t surprising, considering the panel’s comments at oral argument.  Of course this decision is completely wrong.  The Seventh Circuit should have conducted a modern selective incorporation analysis and held the Second Amendment incorporated.  The dicta suggesting that the right to self-defense may be abrogated by statute, and that the exercise of fundamental individual rights can be curtailed at the state level as a nod to federalism, is particularly troubling.

In any event, Chicago’s gun ban is now one step closer to its demise.  Our petition to the Supreme Court will be filed very soon.  Watch this space for details….

MP3 here

I’ve now posted the various amici briefs for the other side on our case filings page.

Our reply briefs will be filed May 14, and will be up on the site as well shortly after they’re in.

Earlier this week, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals held that the Second Amendment does, in fact, bind state and local governments via application of the Fourteenth Amendment.  The court’s opinion in the landmark case of Nordyke v. King adopts the same logic as our arguments in this case, with respect to selective incorporation under the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause.  And it disposes of many of the same tired arguments raised by Chicago in defense of its indefensible gun ban.  Congratulations to the Nordykes’ lawyer, Don Kilmer, for a job well done.

Although the regulations at issue in Nordyke were upheld, we suspect that other irrational and arbitrary state- and local-level gun laws in the Ninth Circuit, serving no useful purpose, will eventually yield to the Second Amendment rights of the American people.  And we eagerly anticipate the day – ever closer – that Chicago residents will enjoy their Second Amendment rights as well.

Towards that end, the Seventh Circuit has now scheduled argument in our case for Tuesday, May 26, 2009, at 9:30 a.m.  I look forward to arguing the matter.  Have a great Memorial Day weekend.

Many peope have asked, “so when will we see something from the city?”

Today, your wait is over.  The city’s brief is here.

In another week, the other side’s amici.  And then, May 1, our reply.

Argument?  TBD by the Court.  My guess is as good as yours, but we will post that information here whenever it arrives.

An excellent story in today’s edition of Legal Times explains some of the strategies and ramifications of our litigation.  Registration required:

http://www.law.com/jsp/dc/PubArticleDC.jsp?id=1202428376741&hub=TopStories

Intriguingly, the story relates the following from my friend Dennis Hennigan at the Brady Campaign.  Speaking of our progressive allies, who welcome our attempts to restore the original meaning of the Fourteenth Amendment, Henigan says:

“It’s unfortunate that they would choose to participate in a gun case to grind that particular ax” because of the public safety implications. That said, Henigan added that applying the Second Amendment right to the states may not have major impact, so long as it is the restricted right announced in Heller.

But doesn’t the Brady Center claim to shy away from DC/Chicago-style gun bans? Do they now support gun prohibition as a public safety measure?  And are we to expect Brady’s support for incorporating the “right announced in Heller?”  We can disagree later, I suppose, about the full extent of that right, but for now, it would be interesting to see if they sit this one out.   Of course I wouldn’t bet on it.

All five friend-of-the-court briefs supporting our case are up now and posted on the case filings page.

Today we filed our opening brief in the Court of Appeals. The basic arguments may be familiar to those who have followed the proceedings below, but we had somewhat more room to work with at this stage, not to mention the decision below required a response.

All three remaining Chicago-area cases, ours and the two brought by the NRA against Chicago and Oak Park, have been consolidated on appeal. That means that they will be heard and decided together by the same panel, and the parties on both sides are to minimize the degree of overlapping arguments among them. We’ll post the other briefs on this website (the NRA’s, the Cities’, and amicis’) as they come in.

In a week, we expect the amici supporting us to file their briefs. Chicago and Oak Park turn in their efforts in thirty days, followed by their amici in a week. We then get a reply two weeks later. The case will most likely be argued, and perhaps even decided by the Court of Appeals, sometime this year.

Stay tuned…

As we prepare to file our opening brief in the 7th Circuit (Jan. 28), I’ll be visiting Chicago to discuss this case and the future of Second Amendment litigation.

The Federalist Society’s student chapters at three Chicago area law schools will be hosting me at lunchtime events: University of Chicago, Jan. 13; Northwestern, Jan. 14; and DePaul, Jan. 15.

On the evening of January 13, I’ll be participating in a panel discussion hosted by the Federalist Society’s Chicago Lawyers Chapter, along with Paul Helmke, President of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, and James Lindgren, Northwestern University Professor of Law and co-author of “Counting Guns in Early America.” Reception starts at 5:30, dinner is at 6:00, at Petterino’s, 150 N. Dearborn Street. The cost for this event is $30 ($10 for students). Seating is limited, so RSVP to chicagofederalistsociety@yahoo.com if you’re interested.