[Mojave]

Excellent brief. It clearly states and cites the long unbroken string of legal precedents and it provides numerous historical facts regarding recognized state rights as demonstrated by actual municipal regulations going back to the earliest days of our nation.

[publiusF27]

I sort of agree, being suspicious of the whole incorporation doctrine. But my feeling is, it is here to stay, and given that, might as well use it to challenge gun control laws which would otherwise remain unchallenged.

Also, I wouldn't really call that an "excellent" brief, as they missed something really big and really basic right off the bat in the summary. The City said:

"... although conferring an individually held right, the scope of the Second Amendment's protection is circumscribed by its primary purpose of preventing federal disarmament of the militia."

I know you and rp used to be fond of that view, but it's over. The Supreme Court just held the following in Heller:

1. The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. Pp. 2–53.

(a) The Amendment’s prefatory clause announces a purpose, but does not limit or expand the scope of the second part, the operative clause.

That was kind of an important part of the Heller ruling, which is why noted leftist Scalia put it right in the holdings section at the top, yet the gungrabbers in Chicago either missed it or are still in denial, which is why they are going to lose, lose, lose on the handgun ban. Again. :D

[publiusF27]

Excellent brief.

What do you think of the NRA's opposing brief?

Or the one submitted by Gura and the Second Amendment Foundation?

If they have terrible, sloppy legal reasoning, you have GOT to help them clean it up NOW! Why are you wasting time with me? I'm not going to the 7th Circuit in a month!