Replies

The 5th Circuit dicta in Emerson was the inspiration for Reinhardt's written diatribe. And yes, I am very familiar with the 9th's reputation. But the USSC will be looking at these cases when coming to some decision on the second amendment so, in that respect, they're damaging.

Not only the 9th argued for the "collective right" interpretation -- it was just the most recent and most memorable.

"and that the petition for writ of certiaori in the Nordyke case is pending before the US Supreme Court"

Are you saying that the 9th refused to hear it en banc?

The 5th Circuit dicta in Emerson was the inspiration for Reinhardt's written diatribe. And yes, I am very familiar with the 9th's reputation. But the USSC will be looking at these cases when coming to some decision on the second amendment so, in that respect, they're damaging.

DICTA - The part of a judicial opinion which is merely a judge's editorializing and does not directly address the specifics of the case at bar; extraneous material which is merely informative or explanatory.

You call the Fifth Circuit's examination dicta, but that's not the case. In order to rule on whether Mr. Emerson had standing to bring a Second Amendment claim, it was necessary to investigate what right of his, if any, it protected. The pages of the Emerson decision represent the results of that investigation, and they can't be considered extraneous or explanatory.

The Reinhardt examination is, however, dicta because the Ninth Circuit already had settled law on the scope of the Second Amendment from the Hickman v. Block case, and the only words necessary in a ruling on that case were "Denied. See Hickman v. Block." What's beyond that is Reinhardt's extrinsicity.

Considering the scope and detail of the Fifth Circuit's examination of the historical context of the Second Amendment, and the scope and detail of the numerous dissents to the Ninth Circuit's decisions in Silveira and Nordyke, I think most of the "damage" is likely to be principally centered on the "collective rights" model.

Are you saying that the 9th refused to hear it en banc?

Yes, that's correct.

Here's the opinion, which includes dissents from five different judges in the Circuit. (Kleinfeld - "Our court has erased 10% of the Bill of Rights for 20% of the American people." -- Gould - "The collective rights view ... places undue weight on a confused interpretation of the prefatory clause to reach the conclusion...")

The certiorari petition in Nordyke was filed a few weeks ago, and will be made available on a CD-ROM that they'll market in order to raise money for the case. It's docket number 03-1707.