Difference between revisions of "Nordyke v. King"

From Calguns Foundation Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
m (Status)
m (Commentary and Analysis)
Line 80: Line 80:
 
== Commentary and Analysis ==
 
== Commentary and Analysis ==
  
*August 19, 2010 - [http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-seattle/saf-files-amicus-nordyke-case-10-year-olds-and-guns SAF files amicus in Nordyke case; 10-year-olds and guns] by Dave Workman, ''Seattle Gun Rights Examiner''
+
*August 19, 2010 - [http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-seattle/saf-files-amicus-nordyke-case-10-year-olds-and-guns SAF files amicus in Nordyke case;] by Dave Workman, ''Seattle Gun Rights Examiner''
  
 
*July 20, 2010 - [http://www.examiner.com/x-30407-LA-AntiEstablishment-Examiner~y2010m7d20-The-next-gun-rights-battle-is-a-turkey-shoot The next gun rights battle is a turkey shoot] by Charles Nichols, ''LA Anti-Establishment Examiner''
 
*July 20, 2010 - [http://www.examiner.com/x-30407-LA-AntiEstablishment-Examiner~y2010m7d20-The-next-gun-rights-battle-is-a-turkey-shoot The next gun rights battle is a turkey shoot] by Charles Nichols, ''LA Anti-Establishment Examiner''

Revision as of 14:32, 14 September 2010

Introduction

Nordyke v. King is a case challenging an effective ban on gun shows on county property by the county of Alameda. While the case was originally about gun shows on county property, it may now play a crucial role in defining the judicial standard of review for scrutinizing other laws facing second amendment challenges.

Alan M. Gottlieb, Second Amendment Foundation founder and Executive Vice President had this to say about the Nordyke case:

“This is a very important case, 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.” <ref name="SAF News Release 8/19/2010">SAF FILES AMICUS BRIEF IN NORDYKE CASE, ARGUES FOR STRICT SCRUTINY</ref>

Status

This case is case number 07-15763 filed in U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (San Francisco).

FUTURE EVENTS

 * October 19, 2010 - Oral Arguments to be heard at 1:30 PM at the James M. Browning Courthouse in San Francisco.
  • September 9, 2010 Oral arguments scheduled for October 19, 2010 at 1:30 PM at the James M. Browning Courthouse in San Francisco.
* Amicus Brief of the CRPA Foundation;
* Amicus Brief of the NRA;
* Amicus Brief of the Calguns Foundation;
* Brief on behalf of the Nordykes;
* Amicus Brief of LCAV;
* Amicus Brief of SAF;
* Amicus Brief of Gun Owners of California, Inc.;
* Brief on behalf of the County of Alameda
* Amicus Brief of Brady Center
  • August 17, 2010 - CRPAF files a brief. Calgunlaws.com (C.D. Michel) would appreciate it if you would register there so you may receive updates in the future.
  • July 12, 2010 - 9th Circuit en banc panel files an order stating
The panel opinion in Nordyke v. King, 563 F.3d 439 (9th Cir. 2009), is 
vacated and the case is remanded to that panel for further consideration
in light of McDonald v. City of Chicago, No. 08-1521, slip op. (U.S.
June 28, 2010).
  • July 9, 2010 - Don Kilmer files a "28J" letter with 9th Circuit asking that the McDonald decision be considered in the en banc proceeding.
  • September 24, 2009 - The en banc panel heard oral arguments in the morning. Later in the afternoon, the panel vacated the submission, effectively deferring to SCOTUS for a resolution of McDonald v. City of Chicago.
  • September 14,2009 - The en banc panel has been set: Chief Judge Kozinski, Pregerson, Reinhardt, O'Scannlain, Rymer, Hawkins, Graber, Gould, Tallman, M. Smith, Ikuta.
  • August 21, 2009 - Oral argument set for 10:00 am Thursday, September 24, in Courtroom One at the James R. Browning Courthouse, located at 95 Seventh Street in San Francisco, California.
  • July 29, 2009 - Judge Kozinski filed an order that the case will be heard en banc. Oral argument to be the week of September 21, 2009. Further status from the 9th Circuit at this link.
  • June 8, 2009 - Alameda files its en banc brief.
  • May 18, 2009 - Late the afternoon of Monday May 18th, the 9th Circuit informed all parties in Nordyke that a judge of the 9th Circuit has has called for a vote to determine whether the case will be reheard en banc.

Calguns discussions

Commentary and Analysis

Background

In August 1999, Alameda County passed an ordinance making illegal the possession of firearms on County property. In pertinent part, the Ordinance reads: “Every person who brings onto or possesses on county property a firearm, loaded or unloaded, or ammunition for a firearm is guilty of a misdemeanor.” Alameda County, Cal., Ordinance § 9.12.120(b). The Ordinance would forbid the presence of firearms at gun shows held at the Fairgrounds. As a practical matter, the Ordinance makes it unlikely that a gun show could profitably be held there.

Russ and Sallie Nordyke who own the TS Trade Show and various gun rights supporters represented by Don Kilmer filed suit against the County of Alameda alleging that Alameda's Ordinance was preempted by state law and violated various of their First Amendment rights.

Nordyke v. King Historical Notes

This case has a long and convoluted history.

The case was filed in 1999. It has been heard by the Ninth Circuit three times, 
including en banc after a sua sponte call for a vote, and had even passed through 
the California Supreme Court on a certified question. Following the panel’s next 
decision, it could well return before the en banc court, and perhaps reach the Supreme Court.<ref name="Pena v. Cid Doc 27">Joint Status Report, Document 27 filed in Pena v. Cid</ref>

For a concise history lesson on this case, please read here or here

Old Nordyke v. King Wiki Historical Notes

Notes

<references/>

External links