The plaintiffs in these cases are suing because democracy failed them. They didn’t have the votes in the places where votes count: the ballot box at referendum time, the state legislature. They turned to the courts because the Constitution, and the judiciary that is supposed to enforce it, must check democracy’s excesses. Majorities are only entitled to have their way when they aren’t having their way with someone’s rights. But if constitutional interpretation is all about who has the most votes for a policy, why should the Court care about votes on an internet brief when it can look to the result of a real statewide election?

…

There are plenty of places for you to pitch your soapbox, court ain’t one of them.

Alan Gura
March 4, 2015
Amicus Detritus
[While in this instance Gura is not referring to gun rights litigation the principle is the same. This principle, as well as many others, appears to be lost on our opponents. It may benefit us to remind them of this at appropriate times.

It wouldn’t matter if 90% of the population were in favor of enslaving the other 10%. The U.S. Constitution does not allow for that and any laws enabling it can and should be struck down. The same applies to laws infringing upon the right to keep and bear arms.—Joe]

Defendants cannot support their position with any factual data regarding machineguns with respect to law abiding citizens. It cannot be done and there is no justification for § 922(o)’s prohibition with regard to a law abiding citizen…

Stephen D. Stamboulieh and Alan Alexander Beck
February 27, 2015
Case No.3:14-cv-03872-M
JAY AUBREY ISAAC HOLLIS Individually and as Trustee of the JAY AUBREY ISAAC HOLLIS REVOCABLE LIVING TRUST, Plaintiff,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General of the United States; B. TODD JONES, Director of the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco Firearm and Explosives, Defendants.
PLAINTIFF’S SUR-REPLY TO DEFENDANTS’ REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
[H/T to Ry for the Tweet.

Work is in progress on making new manufacture machine guns available to the general public. I am not a lawyer but it seems the ATF made some serious forced errors in regards to trusts. While legally a very narrow window of opportunity these may bear fruit when leveraged with the Heller, McDonald, and Mance decisions.

This is consistent with what we were thinking seven years ago while waiting for the Heller decision.—Joe]

When the government has a dog of a case, someone has to draw the short straw and argue it. In Henderson v. United States, Assistant to the Solicitor General Ann O’Connell drew that straw. It seems clear that the Court will side with petitioner Tony Henderson – a felon seeking the right to sell or otherwise dispose of firearms that he owns but can no longer legally possess. In offering concession after concession and various fallback options, the government offered a case study in controlled implosions.

Richard M. Re
February 25, 2015
Argument analysis: A controlled implosion
Via Firearms Policy ‏@gunpolicy
[As we build a stronger and stronger foundation of case law more and more of the unconstitutional firearms laws and regulations will result in these sort of implosions. They are defending a house of cards and ultimate nearly all of it will fall to the fundamental principles.—Joe]

So, rather than allow a woman to actually defend herself, the University of Colorado believes a woman can urinate her way out of a rape or she might just have to sit there and take it.

When will this madness end? And when will feminists demand that women on college campuses be allowed to protect and defend themselves against sexual assault?

S.E. Cupp
February 23, 2015
Guns for women on campus make sense
Via a Tweet from Kevin Naugle ‏@NaugleKevin.
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

New Jersey authorities operate like the state is their personal fiefdom when it comes to gun permits and that needs to change. The rights of people like Mr. Almeida should not be subject to the arbitrary discretion of public officials for whom no reason will ever be good enough.

Alan Gottlieb
February 23, 2015
SAF Funds Challenge to New Jersey Carry Law
[I have nothing to add.—Joe]

As late as 1733 gentlemen of Virginia were said to be naked when they went in public without their swords. They appear not to have gone naked in this sense very often.

David Hackett Fischer
1989
Albion’s Seed: Four British Folkways in America (America: A Cultural History)
[What does this tell you about the original intent of the Second Amendment?—Joe]