Posted on 07/29/2008 6:30:37 PM PDT by neverdem
That's correct. The Circuit Court even mandated that "strict scrutiny" was the proper standard to use, as I recall.
One potential problem is that Circuit Courts are made up of many judges (perhaps one or two dozen?) and the panel that made the remarkably good decision was only three judges, one of whom was a dissenter with the decision.
That means that a different panel from the DC Circuit could become involved in challenging DC's contemptible behavior. Those judges may not be on board. I don't know if there is a mechanism which ensures that the original panel is the one who hears follow-up cases.
But as long as the original panel constituting the Supreme Court stays in place, we should expect 5-4 affirming decisions. If the DC Circuit does its job, there will be no need for the Supreme Court to grant cert to any future DC appeal.
Robert Levy did bring the case to court. Based on the decision, the NRA has five lawsuits against cities which have gun bans.
Are you suggesting the NRA do nothing and let Robert levy sue those cities?
By the way, Robert Levy mentioned in an article that he and the NRA have a good working relationship.
this is why I hesitate to give more money to the NRA.....
NO ... I am suggesting that the NRA is a typical Washington lobbying group that takes no chances itself, but piggybacks on the success of others’ (Levy) bold efforts to raise funds for itself. If you don’t understand that, you don’t know how DC works.
Levy has also said that he’s never owned a gun in his life and, as I recall, never belonged to the NRA ... his interest as a libertarian was only in the Constitutional issues. I admire him as a principled individual more than every lobbyist in DC put together.
The DC Circuit has 13 judges, 8 or 9 of whom were appointed by Republican presidents ... so chances of a 2:1 panel decision, especially in light of the SCOTUS decision, are fairly decent.
http://www.cadc.uscourts.gov/internet/home.nsf/content/judges
The NRA has five lawsuits going on. Exactly who are they piggybacking on for those suits?
Levy should be admired for his success but he also had absolutely nothing to lose. He never owned a gun in his life which are your words. The NRA had reason to be concerned because they knew it was going to be closer than others thought.
NRA is piggybacking on the success of the Heller suit. Are you claiming they’re not? The yeoman’s work (legal precedent) upon which all five NRA suits will rest was done in Heller.
The suit wasn’t about OWNING a gun; it was about an American citizen’s RIGHT to own a gun under the Second Amendment.
Clearly you’ve never litigated to say Levy “had absolutely nothing to lose.” Do you have a single clue about the cost of time, money, abd energy it takes to get a suit to the SCOTUS?
Maybe, just maybe, Levy holds the Constitution itself in higher regard than those who merely lobby Congress but are afraid to take on the major Constitutional issue cited in their logo because they were concerned the vote might be close. That’s real courage.
To think NRA is any better or any worse than any other large lobbying organization is delusional.
It’s more accurate to say that Levy piggybacked on the work done by the NRA and the other gun groups for the last forty years.
ok, so cite me the cases that the NRA brought that Heller depended upon.
Your “firemen” is setting fires... Not exactly the smartest course of action.
Post #35: “Robert Levy did bring the case to court. Based on the decision, the NRA has five lawsuits against cities which have gun bans.”
Post #28: “It’s more accurate to say that Levy piggybacked on the work done by the NRA and the other gun groups for the last forty years.”
Which is it?
I don’t recall the NRA bringing any claims against DC for its egregious assault on its citizens’ right to bear/keep arms. However, I will concede that I have other fish to fry and haven’t followed the issue as closely as others. I would really like to know what, exactly, the NRA did about the DC ban for the past 35 years.
BS. Cato took the ball the NRA has dropped time and again and ran 100 yrds with it for a touchdown.
That's because there weren't any. Instead, the NRA tried to backstab the Heller case by trying to talk DC into repealing the ban.
To be fair, IIRC, Levy did this on his own, not as a member of Cato. Part of his strategy was to find (as he did) plaintiffs unaffiliated with any advocacy group of any persuasion, just plain folks, to remove the possibility of the case’s being perceived as a policital rather than Constitutional issue. The guy was a genius IMO.
Thankful. Grateful. In admiration of...
But not surprised.
I think you are right. I recall that DC requested an "en banc" rehearing from the DC Circuit Court and that the request was denied. In light of the dramatic breadth of the decision, that was a very good sign.
One thing about Cato folks is that they really are free thinkers in the most positive sense of the word, not swayed by trends, etc. Way more liberal than I on any number of issues (social) but I admire their thoughtful process to get to their position rather than just jumping on board the chic stand of the day or following a party line.
Personally, I'm very conservative. I don't smoke, I drink in moderation, I try to live a good life. However, if my neighbor wants to have drunken dwarf orgies and broadcast them over the Internet, as long as they do so in the confines of their own property it is none of my concern.
Equal Rights of others are exactly that. Just because something is not against the law, does not mean that everyone is going to run out and do it. A fact lost on many who clamor for the Nanny State.
But, we're wandering a bit far afield here.
The Cato folks use an awful lot of logic. This is a good thing IMO. Yeah, there are those that'll use circular logic and other tricks of the trade to try and worm around certain things, but the Cato folks seem to play a very even game.
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.