Posted on 12/03/2007 9:48:57 AM PST by Publius Valerius
Robert A. Levy, a rich libertarian lawyer who has never owned a gun, helped create and single-handedly financed the case that may finally resolve the meaning of the Second Amendment.
* * *
They started by interviewing dozens of potential plaintiffs in Washington.
“We wanted gender diversity,” Mr. Levy said. “We wanted racial diversity. We wanted age diversity. We wanted income diversity.”
The lawyers picked three men and three women, four white and two black. “They ranged in age from 20s to 60s,” Mr. Levy said, “with varying incomes and varying occupations.”
* * *
“We didn’t want to be going to the court with a radical case,” Mr. Levy said. “All we are asking is to let law-abiding residents of the District of Columbia possess functional firearms to defend themselves where they live and sleep.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
Outrageous!
Only liberals are supposed to work the system like this!
What’s worse - he’s a LIBERTARIAN!!! Like ... gasp!! ... RON PAUL!!!
OH NOOOOOO!!!!!
Those guys should get their own forum. This here place is for conservatives. Security first! /s
This article by the NYT is almost glowing in it’s praise. Why they even invoke Thurgood Marshall. THURGOOD MARSHALL!! He is practically a saint of the Left.
No surprise that Cato and the Libertarians would have run-ins with the NRA.
http://www.cato.org/people/levy.html
Robert A. Levy
Hi-Res Photo
Robert A. Levy is senior fellow in constitutional studies and a member of the board of directors at the Cato Institute, which he joined in 1997 after 25 years in business. He also sits on boards of the Institute for Justice, the Federalist Society, and the George Mason University School of Law. He founded CDA Investment Technologies, a major provider of financial information and software, and was its CEO until 1991. Levy clerked for Judge Royce C. Lamberth on the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C., and for Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. From 1997 until 2004, Levy was an adjunct professor of law at Georgetown University. He has written numerous articles on investments, law, and public policy. His writing has appeared in the New York Times, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, Washington Post, National Review, and many other publications. Levy has also discussed public policy on national radio and TV programs, including ABC’s Nightline, CNN’s Crossfire, Fox’s The O’Reilly Factor, MSNBC’s Hardball, and NBC’s Today Show. His latest book, published in November 2004, is Shakedown: How Corporations, Government, and Trial Lawyers Abuse the Judicial Process. Levy received his Ph.D. in business from the American University and his J.D. degree from the George Mason University School of Law.
Media Contact: 202-789-5200
To Book a Speaking Engagement: 202-789-5226
E-Mail: rlevy@cato.org
I am currently fondling my free pocket copy of The United States Constitution (yes, it’s out of my pocket at the moment), courtesy of The CATO Institute.
Never got one from the Republicans.
I wonder why ...
In the 25 years I’ve been acquainted with the Libertarians and Cato (including a stint as a paid staffer), this is the first time I can recall that they’ve actually gone out and done something truly tangible and significant on their very own steam.
I know a couple of the plaintiffs, they are absolutely uncompromising on libertarian principles. No surprise they’re involved.
Hmmmm. Cato and the Libertarians. Weren't they the band that did 96 Tears in the 60's?
It does appear to have had some planning. Good !
Excellent catch, a classic one hit wonder makes good.
Well, not really.
What you're really asking is that the U.S. Supreme Court settle a dispute that has been going on for decades and make a finding for an individual right to keep and bear arms, contrary to just about every lower federal circuit court ruling.
"All we are asking", indeed.
Ping
You just don't give up do you...
Question Mark & the Mysterians
Security starts at home:
The only dissenting vote in the short House debate on the [NICS Expansion] bill was voiced by GOP presidential aspirant Ron Paul (news, bio, voting record) of Texas. He described the bill as “a flagrantly unconstitutional expansion of restriction on the exercise of the right to bear arms.”
The Second Amendment is the foundation of personal security and individual liberty. Any candidate that doesn't recognize that fact and act in accordance with it is not worthy of your trust or your vote.
And that, my friend, is as "conservative" as it comes.
"... the right of the militia-people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, but only if they are part of the militia at the time of said infringement. And they have to fill out the right paperwork and pass a background check, and wait a few days for the government to approve the de-infringement the rest of the non-militia is subject to. Or whatever."
Hardly. The SCOTUS wrote the question so specifically that the only thing that's going to change is DC residents will be allowed to have a completly inoperable weapon in their house. Never mind getting it there.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.