Author Topic: NRA Brief in McDonald v. Chicago  (Read 1681 times)

Offline Richard S

  • Grand Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 5772
  • Nemo me impune lacessit.
NRA Brief in McDonald v. Chicago
« on: November 18, 2009, 10:35:00 AM »
On November 16, 2009, the NRA filed its brief with the United States Supreme Court in the case of McDonald, et. al. v. City of Chicago, et al., No. 08-1521.  The question presented is: "Whether the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms is incorporated as against the States by the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities or Due Process Clauses."

The text of the brief can be found at the following link:

http://www.nraila.org/pdfs/NRA08-1521.pdf
(1963-1967) "GO ARMY!"

Online tracker

  • Grand Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 5391
Re: NRA Brief in McDonald v. Chicago
« Reply #1 on: November 18, 2009, 10:56:27 AM »

Thanks for posting that well written and comprehensive brief, Richard.

Offline kjtrains

  • Grand Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 8107
Re: NRA Brief in McDonald v. Chicago
« Reply #2 on: November 18, 2009, 11:38:32 AM »
Richard.  Thanks, from me, as well, for this information; informative as to what's going on.
Let us have faith that right makes might, and in that faith, let us, to the end, dare to do our duty as we understand it.  Abraham Lincoln

Offline Aglifter

  • Grand Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 599
  • Thanks and Gig 'em
Re: NRA Brief in McDonald v. Chicago
« Reply #3 on: November 18, 2009, 01:34:51 PM »
http://www.chicagoguncase.com/  Has the petitioner's brief, for those that are interested.  It's commendable, it's attempting to argue that rights found to pre-date the Con/14th amendment, cannot be restricted (the idea of Fundamental Rights).  
And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

Online tracker

  • Grand Master
  • *****
  • Posts: 5391
Re: NRA Brief in McDonald v. Chicago
« Reply #4 on: November 18, 2009, 02:15:55 PM »

I am pleased to see that Texas, with many other states, is a friend of the court in this case