Archive for the ‘Second Amendment’ Category
Another possible reason for the LAT story on NRA v. Chicago
posted by Kaimipono D. Wenger
Over at the conspiracy, Eugene Volokh points out an odd fact — while the L.A. Times gives rather extensive coverage to the recent NRA v. Chicago, it gave no coverage at the time to Nordyke v. King, which was a California case. Eugene offers a few possible rationales for this difference:
To be sure, there are possible explanations: Today’s story was by the Times’ Supreme Court reporter, and this case is more likely than the Ninth Circuit case to go to the Supreme Court, for reasons I described here. The underlying controversy in the Seventh Circuit (a handgun ban) is more likely to interest people than the underlying controversy in the Ninth Circuit (a ban on gun possession on county property). And it’s made higher profile by the controversy about Judge Sotomayor’s participation in the Second Circuit’s no-incorporation decision.
At the same time, the broad legal issue — whether state and local governments are bound by the federal right to bear arms — is the same. The Ninth Circuit decision was the one that created the circuit split, and it did tee things up for the Court to consider the Second Circuit’s incorporation case (again, discussed here) — perhaps not perfectly, but still in a way that strikes me as newsworthy. The Ninth Circuit decision is the one that suggests some gun laws may be unconstitutional, which seems to me a pretty newsworthy matter. And the Ninth Circuit case was more local than the Seventh Circuit case.
(In comments, VC readers seem to mostly be of the opinion that the story shows a concerted editorial campaign to promote gun control through skewed news reporting.)
I’d suggest another possible reason — there’s a man-bites-dog aspect of the story which Eugene doesn’t mention; and no, it’s not the cheesy “wow, Republican judges can rule against gun rights” factor. Rather, it’s the fact that incorporation was widely expected to have an easier road than this. Read the rest of this post »
June 4, 2009 at 8:11 am
Tags: eugene volokh, media, news, Second Amendment
Posted in: Current Events, Second Amendment
Print This Post
2 Comments
Practical Advice: Don’t Let Your Client Pay You in Guns
posted by Dave Hoffman
Wow. A pharmacist accused of murder decided to pay his lawyer with his firearm collection. When the Judge presiding over his case inquired as to how many guns, exactly, that collection entailed, a constitutional fight ensued. Quick: which amendment gets play? (Hint: it’s not the 2nd!)
“I gave every weapon of mine to my attorney. I swear to the Lord,” Jerome Jay Ersland said.
Oklahoma County District Judge Tammy Bass-LeSure last week allowed Ersland, 57, of Chickasha to be released on $100,000 bail but she banned him from any access to weapons. The hearing today was to see if he had complied with her order.
Ersland told the judge he no longer owns the weapons. Defense attorney Irven Box said he took the weapons and other personal property from Ersland as payment of part of the attorney fees in the case.
Box told the judge he has accepted other unusual payments in the past, including comic books.
The case arises out of Ersland’s shooting – in purported self-defense – of an individual robbing his store. You can see the video here. And as for the constitutional right to withhold information about Ersland’s gun collection? That would be the right against self-incrimination:
District Attorney David Prater also said prosecutors could use the answer to that question against Ersland at trial.
The judge at one point said she would put Ersland back in jail if he didn’t answer her question but eventually she decided not to revoke his bail. She said she had learned a lesson and will not in the future let a defense attorney collect a defendant’s weapons.
This advice is generalizable. Take cash over credit, and credit over barter. And never, ever, take the instruments of the crime.
June 1, 2009 at 11:47 am
Posted in: Criminal Law, Criminal Procedure, Current Events, Second Amendment, Weird
Print This Post
5 Comments
A Talk About Heller at ‘Bama
posted by Mike O'Shea
This Thursday I’ll be in recently rain-swept Tuscaloosa, giving a talk at the University of Alabama School of Law on “The Future of the Right to Arms After D.C. v. Heller.” at the kind invitation of ‘Bama’s chapter of the Federalist Society. I hope to discuss Heller’s revision of U.S. v. Miller, the role of nineteenth-century state court decisions in Heller, and future Second Amendment battlegrounds such as incorporation, concealed carry, and the possible renewal of the expired federal “assault weapons” ban. Time permitting, I’ll also discuss what Heller illustrates about the distinctive character of American conservatism.
The talk will be held at 12:00 p.m. Thursday, August 28, in the Moot Courtroom in the UA Law School building. It would be a treat to encounter some CoOp readers there.
Travel bleg:
I’ve never been to Alabama. Any suggestions for things to do/see during a brief visit to Tuscaloosa or Birmingham (where I’m staying)? I do plan to visit the Birmingham Civil Rights Institute.
August 26, 2008 at 7:56 pm
Posted in: Current Events, Second Amendment, Supreme Court
Print This Post
8 Comments
