Second Amendment Foundation

BELLEVUE, WA --(Ammoland.com)- The Second Amendment Foundation has filed an amicus curiae brief in the long-running Nordyke v. King case in California, arguing that Second Amendment issues must be decided on a “strict scrutiny” basis, and that an ordinance in Alameda County banning gun shows at the county fairgrounds is unconstitutional because it would not withstand that standard of review.

This case was a catalyst for the U.S. Supreme Court to hear SAF’s case challenging the handgun ban in Chicago, because in an earlier Nordyke ruling - subsequently set aside in favor of a full en banc hearing by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals - created a conflict in the circuits over Second Amendment incorporation.

SAF’s brief was written by attorney Alan Gura, who argued the landmark 2008 Heller case and represented SAF and its co-plaintiffs in the recent McDonald case, and is currently working with the foundation on other cases in Maryland, Illinois, New York and North Carolina.

Alameda County passed an ordinance more than ten years ago prohibiting the carrying of firearms on county property following a shooting at the county fair in 1998. Russell and Sallie Nordyke operated a gun show at the county fairgrounds. The shooting incident was not related to their gun show, but county officials used that as an excuse to adopt the prohibition.

“This is a very important case,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb, “because it could establish the highest standard of scrutiny to which gun laws around the country would be subjected. While gun prohibitionists were upset by the 2008 Heller ruling and demoralized by our victory this year in the McDonald case, they are terrified of a strict scrutiny standard that could be established by the Nordyke case.”

The Nordyke case’s importance, Gottlieb stated, “cannot be underestimated, or understated.”

“Strict scrutiny is the standard of review to which all constitutionally-protected fundamental civil rights must be held,” he observed.

“This case has survived for more than a decade, a fact in itself that is remarkable. We believe, in the wake of Heller and McDonald, that the Ninth Circuit must act decisively to protect the Second Amendment from willy-nilly regulation by anti-gun public officials.”

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation’s oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 650,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control. SAF has previously funded successful firearms-related suits against the cities of Los Angeles; New Haven, CT; and San Francisco on behalf of American gun owners, a lawsuit against the cities suing gun makers and an amicus brief and fund for the Emerson case holding the Second Amendment as an individual right.

California Rifle and Pistol Association

California - -(AmmoLand.com)- Multiple briefs have been filed in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals supporting gun show owners who have challenged an Alameda County ordinance banning firearms on county property, including the county fairgrounds.

These include amicus briefs by the National Rifle Association, CATO Institute, Second Amendment Foundation, and Calguns Foundation, as well as the brief for the plaintiffs, the Nordykes. Yesterday The CRPA Foundation (CRPAF) filed its amicusbrief.

Copies of the briefs are being posted at www.calgunlaws.com as they become available.

The Alameda ordinance effectively prohibits gun shows from taking place on the Alameda County Fairgrounds in Pleasanton, California. The Nordyke family promoted gun shows at the fairgrounds from 1991 to 1999. Although no violence was associated with the gun show, Alameda County nonetheless passed the ordinance in 1999 as a way to stop pro-Second Amendment and civil rights activists from gathering there. The Nordykes sued, challenging the ordinance on multiple grounds.

The case has a long and convoluted history. But as the case has progressed the legal issues have narrowed down to whether the ordinance unconstitutionally infringes on the Second Amendment rights of those who promoted or attended the show.

After the trial court most recently ruled against the Nordykes, they appealed. On April 20, 2009, the three-judge Nordyke appeals court panel was the first in the nation to rule that the Second Amendment’s prohibition against infringing on the individual right to keep and bear arms applies not just to federal action, but state and local action as well. Two other circuits, the Second and Seventh, had ruled that the Second Amendment only limits federal government actions.

A federal appellate court ruling applying the Second Amendment to the states via the “incorporation” doctrine was the next major goal for gun rights advocates following the June 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the United States Supreme Court confirmed that the Second Amendment protects a fundamental individual right to self defense and to keep and bear arms. So the Ninth Circuit incorporation ruling in Nordyke was welcome news, and bolstered the arguments for incorporation made in McDonald v. Chicago before the United State Supreme Court.

Although the three-judge panel ruled that the Second Amendment was incorporated, it also held that the Alameda County ordinance was not an unconstitutional infringement of the Second Amendment. The case went up to the Ninth Circuit en banc panel, which stayed the case pending the McDonald decision. When the McDonald decision came down in June 2010 and confirmed the three-judge panel’s conclusion that the Second Amendment applied to state and local actions, the en banc panel sent the case back down to the three judge panel for further consideration.

So the Nordyke case is now back being reconsidered before the three-judge panel in light of the ruling in McDonald v. Chicago. But with the incorporation issue resolved, the three-judge panel is now primarily considering whether the fairgrounds or county property, is a “sensitive place” of the type mentioned in the Heller case where restrictions on firearms such as the Alameda County ordinance would not be unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.

The Nordyke case is significant because the gun ban lobby in California has made and continues to make a concerted effort to pass these types of ordinances around the state and to ban all gun shows in the process as a way to eradicate the gun culture.

The California Rifle and Pistol Association “CRPA,” founded in 1875, is dedicated to defending the rights of law-abiding citizens to responsibly use firearms for self-defense and the defense of their loved ones, for sport, and for all other legal activities. CRPA is the official state association of the National Rifle Association. A California non-profit association, CRPA is independently directed by its own Board of Directors. CRPA’s members include law enforcement officers, prosecutors, professionals, firearm experts, the general public, and loving parents. CRPA has always worked to reduce the criminal misuse of firearms and firearms accidents, while actively promoting and organizing the competitive shooting sports and Olympic training programs in California. We are proud to say that many CRPA competitors are among the best in the world. www.calgunlaws.com

Arizona Citizens Defense League

Glendale, AZ --(AmmoLand.com)- The Arizona Citizens Defense League has joined with other pro-rights individuals, groups and several district attorneys in the filing of an “amicus (friend of the court) brief” with the United State Supreme Court in the case of McDonald v. Chicago, the most critical Second Amendment case since the Heller decision upheld our individual right to keep and bear arms.

In April 2009, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit ruled in Nordyke v. King that the Second Amendment is “incorporated” through the Fourteenth Amendment and applicable to all state and local governments. However in McDonald v. Chicago, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled that the Second Amendment is NOT incorporated through the Fourteenth Amendment and that state and local government laws regarding firearms are not affected by the Second Amendment.

In September, the Supreme Court agreed to consider the McDonald case. We are asking the Supreme Court to hold that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments through the Fourteenth Amendment. You can find a copy of the amicus brief at: http://tinyurl.com/McdonaldAmicus .

Alan Korwin, AzCDL Member and prolific author, whose books include The Arizona Gun Owner’s Guide, is following the McDonald case closely and has posted a plain English summary of the issues at stake at his website: www.gunlaws.com/McDonald_v_Chicago_BP_Amicus.htm.

Alan’s extensive research and material were used in crafting our amicus brief, which was submitted by California attorney Chuck Michel (http://www.michelandassociates.com/).

You can also read more about the McDonald case at the Second Amendment Foundation’s website: http://www.chicagoguncase.com/ .

These alerts are a project of the Arizona Citizens Defense League (AzCDL), an all volunteer, non-profit, non-partisan grassroots organization. Join today! http://www.azcdl.org/html/join_us_.html

AzCDL – Protecting Your Freedom

About:
AzCDL believes that the emphasis of gun laws should be on criminal misuse and that law-abiding citizens should be able to own and carry firearms unaffected by unnecessary laws or regulations. AzCDL was founded by a group of local activists who recognized that a sustained, coordinated, statewide effort was critical to protecting and expanding the rights of law-abiding gun owners. As a like-minded coalition of activists, the AzCDL founders were instrumental in the successful passage of the first major improvement to Arizona’s CCW (concealed carry) laws since they were instituted in 1994. Visit: www.azcdl.org

Michigan Coalition For Responsible Gun Owners

California – -(AmmoLand.com)-The “Chicago Gun Cases” are now pending in the Supreme Court, which should vote on September 29 whether to hear them or not. In the meantime, yet another case is slowly moving in the same direction. Like the Chicago cases, the main issue is whether the 2nd Amendment applies to the States via the 14th Amendment.

Nordyke v. King challenges an Alameda County, California, regulation forbidding carrying of firearms on county property, a rule that was aimed at barring gun shows from the county fairground. Gun show organizers filed suit in 1999 – yes, the case has bounced from one court to another for a full decade! It finally arrived in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers the far west and has historically been anti-gun.

The 9th Circuit has 27 judges, who divide into three judge panels to hear ordinary appeals. In April of this year, the panel that heard Nordyke ruled 3-0 that the 14th Amendment made the 2nd Amendment binding on the States. This was the first time a Federal appeals court had so ruled.

The decision of a three judge panel can be reviewed by the entire court en banc – in most circuits, this means by all the Circuit judges, but in the 9th Circuit it means by 11 judges chosen at random. Motions for en banc rehearings are rarely granted. But something even rarer happened in Nordyke – without either party asking, a majority of the judges requested rehearing on their own.

The en banc hearing was held on September 24. Based on past votes, of the 11 judges, four or five were pro-gun, two were antigun, and 4-5 were unknown. Nordyke’s counsel, Don Kilmer, thought that two of the unknowns seemed favorable during the argument. Few of the questions were hostile to the core issue of applying the 2nd Amendment to the States – most concerned whether gun shows could be held elsewhere, or similar minutae.

Five hours later, the Ninth Circuit announced that it would hold the case, without ruling, until the Supreme Court disposed of the Chicago gun cases. The Circuit saw no reason to stick its neck out, guess what the Supreme Court will think and get its decision reversed if it guesses wrong. If the Supreme Court takes the Chicago cases, the Ninth Circuit will wait for the results before ruling. If it declines the Chicago cases, the 9th Circuit will have to rule (don’t hold your breath: en banc rulings usually take many months), and once it does, the issue may have a second shot at the Supreme Court.

Bio:
David T. Hardy is a Tucson attorney who has authored four books and eighteen law reviews articles, mostly on Second Amendment issues. In Heller, he filed an amicus brief for Academics for the Second Amendment. He produced and directed the documentary DVD “In Search of the Second Amendment,” available at www.secondamendmentdocumentary.com.

About:
The Michigan Coalition for Responsible Gun Owners is a non-profit, non-partisan organization. Formed from just eight people in 1996, we now have thousands of members and numerous affiliated clubs across the state. We’re growing larger and more effective every day.

Our mission statement is: “Promoting safe use and ownership of firearms through education, litigation, and legislation”