Wednesday, February 13, 2013

Right-to-Carry Litigation in Summary

Map of the U.S. federal court system.

While the police finished murdering each other in southern California, and the President prepared “massive” proposals for the Congress, the case of Piszczatoski v. Maenza [now Drake v. Jerejian, 1/09/14] was argued before the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. With an en banc review of the decision in Moore v. Madigan looking unlikely, a victory in Piszczatoski would deepen the circuit split created by the loss in Kachalsky v. Cacace and thus make the conflicting jurisprudence even more difficult for the U.S. Supreme Court to avoid reviewing. Here is a summary of the major right-to-carry cases for those keeping score.

Kachalsky v. Cacace New York Lost on appeal at USCA2.
Moore v. Madigan Illinois Won on appeal at USCA7.
Palmer v. D.C. D.C. Pending decision at USDC since 2010.
Drake v. Jerejian New Jersey Lost on appeal at USCA3. Petitioned for USSC review.
Peruta v. San Diego California Won on appeal at USCA9.
Richards v. Prieto California Won on appeal at USCA9.
Woollard v. Gallagher Maryland Lost on appeal at USCA4.

There is a host of other right-to-arms cases that are working their way through the federal court system, but this is the vanguard litigation. A historical turning point is at hand, though some people can’t or won’t see the important civil-rights implications at work here. Few people need to carry guns, they argue, but then very few people needed to abort pregnancies … or to marry the spouses of their choice … or to ride at the front of the bus.

20 comments:

  1. Excellent summary. Thanks for posting!

    ReplyDelete
  2. En banc review for Moore and Shepard was denied today. Illinois has 90 days to file a petition for writ of certiorari with the U.S. Supreme Court.

    ReplyDelete
  3. What about Peruta? It is not listed.

    ReplyDelete
  4. My list is only a brief summary and is by no means complete. For a more thorough and detailed look, see Al Norris’s thread on Current 2A Cases at the Firing Line or Litigation Past and Present on the Calguns Foundation Wiki.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Appreciate you putting this up. Courts grind so slowly but mean SO much. Living in cali, I fear the courts are our only hope here.

    ReplyDelete
  6. UPDATE: Woollard v. Gallagher has been lost on appeal at the Fourth Circuit, reversing the district-court ruling.

    ReplyDelete
  7. En banc review has been requested in Woollard v. Gallagher. If granted, I suspect that any decision will be held pending the results of Kachalsky v. Cacace at the Supreme Court.

    ReplyDelete
  8. UPDATE: Certiorari has been denied for Kachalsky, and en banc review for Woollard. We now wait on possible certiorari petitions for Moore and/or Woollard.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Piszczatoski v. Maenza is now Drake v. Filko.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Overriding the governor’s veto, the Illinois legislature has passed a shall-issue licensing bill to comply with the Seventh Circuit’s order in Moore v. Madigan.

    ReplyDelete
  11. The U.S. Supreme Court has been petitioned to review Woollard v. Gallagher. The court may accept or reject the case as early as October.

    ReplyDelete
  12. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has upheld the ruling in Drake v. Filko. Disappointing but not unexpected.

    ReplyDelete
  13. UPDATE: Certiorari has been denied for Woollard. The petition for Drake is due by late November.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Drake v. Filko is now Drake v. Jerejian, and a petition for writ of certiorari in that matter has been filed with the U.S. Supreme Court.

    ReplyDelete
  15. You seem to know the Right-to-Carry issue. Can you blog a summary of each sides arguments for Drake v. Jerejian? Make sure you give an honest argument for both sides and keep it simple to the facts. Maybe you'll win over this liberal.

    ReplyDelete
  16. I doubt that I could do better than Alan Gura.

    http://saf.org/legal.action/drake_cert_petition_filed.pdf

    ReplyDelete
  17. Thanks for the link. I'll check it out!

    ReplyDelete
  18. After reading that link, doing my own research and speaking with Travis at the SAF, I fall on your side on this issue. I just wish your side would fall on the liberal side for the issues of background checks and the gun show loop hole. We have way to many senseless murders and accidents due to guns. I personally know a kid that died from an accidental gun shot. He was a great kid and our laws should protect life before liberty.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I encourage you to read my post on reasonable gun control as well.

    http://mdvannorman.blogspot.com/2012/12/reasonable-gun-control.html

    In short, background checks on commercial sales are probably here to stay. However, if that’s the case and as recent legislation indicates, we should also expect them to be applied to voting rights and perhaps other civil rights. I don’t like the idea, but it’s the political reality … unless the U.S. Supreme Court is willing to draw a line.

    Private firearms transfers are more problematic, since they also involve Fourth, Fifth, and Ninth Amendment rights. The better solution would be to open the instant-check system to the general public and allow for voluntary participation. Since most lawful gun owners would prefer to use the system, police resources could be focused more effectively on the questionable transactions that still fell outside it.

    ReplyDelete
  20. I added a row for Peruta v. San Diego in light of today’s historic ruling at the U.S. Court of Appeals.

    http://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2014/02/12/1056971.pdf

    ReplyDelete