Difference between revisions of "Nordyke v. King"
(→Appeal of the Merits Ruling) |
(→Introduction) |
||
(127 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | == | + | == Introduction == |
− | + | ||
− | + | ''Nordyke v. King'' was challenging an effective ban on gun shows on county property by the county of Alameda. | |
− | == | + | == Status == |
+ | PACER case number [https://ecf.ca9.uscourts.gov/cmecf/servlet/TransportRoom?servlet=CaseSummary.jsp&caseNum=07-15763&incOrigDkt=Y&incDktEntries=Y 07-15763] filed in [http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/ U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit] (San Francisco). | ||
− | + | ===Nordyke VI=== | |
+ | [http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16141834160372842342 Nordyke v. King, 681 F. 3d 1041 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 2012] | ||
+ | {| border="1" | ||
+ | !colspan="1" bgcolor="#F2ECCE" |NORDYKE OPINION | ||
+ | |- align="center" | ||
+ | |bgcolor="yellow"|January 8th, 2013: After 12 years of litigation, Nordyke v. King is finally over. The ruling did not impact the 2A right. Gun shows may be held on County property provided that the Nordykes' comply with the ordinance by tethering guns to tables like other merchandise at retail stores. The Nordykes' were not awarded prevailing party status by the court and despite petitioning the Supreme Court, fees and costs are not recoverable. | ||
+ | |} | ||
− | == | + | *November 28, 2011: Chief Judge KOZINSKI issues an [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/attachment.php?attachmentid=124497&d=1322531368 order] to rehear the case en banc: |
+ | ''Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that | ||
+ | this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel | ||
+ | opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit. | ||
+ | Judge Rawlinson did not participate in the deliberations or vote in this case. | ||
+ | '' | ||
+ | |||
+ | * July 18, 2011, Appellants filed a Leave to file Reply Brief in Support of Rehearing for En Banc | ||
+ | |||
+ | * July 11, 2011, Appellees filed a response to Combo PFR Panel and En Banc rehearing. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * June 14, 2011 [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=444689 9th Circuit Orders Alameda County to file Brief in ''Nordyke v. King''] | ||
+ | |||
+ | * May 23, 2011 [http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/Nordyke-v-King/179-1-Petition-for-En-Banc-Review.pdf Request for rehearing and rehearing en banc] | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===Nordyke V=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | * [http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=16860306062835348173 Nordyke v. King, 644 F. 3d 776 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 2011] | ||
+ | |||
+ | * May 2, 2011 - Nordyke V Opinion is [http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2011/05/02/07-15763.pdf released]. Nordyke loses and is sent back to district court to argue the second amendment claim. If no other action is taken, this will reset the timeline approximately another two years. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * October 19, 2010 - Oral Arguments heard at 1:30 PM at the James M. Browning Courthouse in San Francisco. Recording of the arguments [http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/media/view_subpage.php?pk_id=0000006368 here]. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * September 13, 2010 [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/attachment.php?attachmentid=68665&d=1284458011 Don filed a copy 28j letter calling the courts attention to the ''Anderson v. City of Hermosa Beach'' 1A case] | ||
+ | |||
+ | * September 9, 2010 Oral arguments scheduled for October 19, 2010 at 1:30 PM at the James M. Browning Courthouse in San Francisco. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * August 18, 2010 - [http://www.calgunlaws.com/index.php/current-litigation/53-court-filings/907-multiple-legal-briefs-filed-in-nordyke-v-alameda-ninth-circuit-case-may-determine-the-standard-of-review-for-scrutinizing-laws-facing-second-amendment-challenges.html Multiple legal briefs filed in ''Nordyke v King'' ] | ||
+ | |||
+ | * 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 [http://www.calgunlaws.com/images/stories/Docs/Nordyke/1crpa.pdf a brief]. Calgunlaws.com (C.D. Michel) would appreciate it if you would [http://www.calgunlaws.com/index.php/register.html register] there so you may receive updates in the future. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * July 13, 2010 - Attorney Don Kilmer (representing Nordykes) filed a [http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/Nordyke-v-King/Motion-for-Supp-Brief-Filed-2010-07-13.pdf motion for supplemental briefing] to the 3-judge panel. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===Nordyke IV - VACATED - === | ||
+ | |||
+ | * [http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=4652598510156282452 Nordyke v. King, 611 F. 3d 1015 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 2010 ] Nordyke IV - VACATED | ||
+ | |||
+ | * July 12, 2010 - 9th Circuit en banc panel files [http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2010/07/12/07-15763.pdf 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 [http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/Nordyke-v-King/Nordyke-28j-post-McDonald.pdf "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 [http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php/McDonald_v._Chicago ''McDonald v. City of Chicago'']. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * September 14,2009 - The ''en banc'' panel has been [http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/calendaring/2009/09/14/sf92109eb.pdf 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 [http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2009/07/29/0715763ebo.pdf 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 [http://www.ca9.uscourts.gov/enbanc/view.php?pk_id=0000000037 this link]. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * June 8, 2009 - Alameda files its en banc [http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/Nordyke-v-King/Alameda-en-banc-Brief-2009-06-08.pdf brief]. | ||
+ | |||
+ | *June 6, 2009 - The Nordykes have [http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/Nordyke-v-King/EN-BANC-BRIEF-w-APP-2009-06-08.pdf filed their en banc brief] and a [http://www.hoffmang.com/firearms/Nordyke-v-King/APPELLANT-28(J)-LTR-2009-06-08.pdf 28(j) letter] discussing the 7th Circuit's ruling in NRA & McDonald v. Chicago. | ||
+ | |||
+ | *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. | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===Nordyke IV=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | *[http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=5678782307901693880 Nordyke v. King, 563 F. 3d 439 (9th Cir. 2009) (“Nordyke IV”)] | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===Nordyke III=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | *[http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15142229077642329656& Nordyke v. King, 319 F.3d 1185, 1190 (9th Cir. 2003) (“Nordyke III”)] | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===Nordyke II=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | * [http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=15739810071406599158 Nordyke v.King, 44 P.3d 133, 138 (Cal. 2002) (“Nordyke II”)] | ||
+ | |||
+ | ===Nordyke I=== | ||
+ | |||
+ | * [http://scholar.google.com/scholar_case?case=3438675193782582092 Nordyke v. King, 229 F. 3d 1266 (9th Cir. 2000 (“Nordyke I”)] | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Calguns discussions == | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=7577326&posted=1#post7577326 Nordyke v. King update: 9th Circuit to Rehear En Banc (Order Nov 28 2011)] | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?p=7104928 Nordyke: Request for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc] May, 2011 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=427991 NORDYKE OPINED MAY 2] May, 2011 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=354321 Nordyke III Audio is released:] October, 2010 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=354241 NORDYKE III Orals.] October, 2010 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=340719 Could Anderson v. Hermosa Beach (1A Tattoo shop victory) be relevant to Nordyke?] September, 2010 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=340816 Oral arguments scheduled in Nordyke] September, 2010 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=333268 MORE NORDYKE BRIEFS FILED] August, 2010 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=333298 CGF Nordyke Amicus Brief - Ban limits supply - has no crime effect] August, 2010 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=320837 Nordyke: En Banc Dismissed, Remanded to Panel] July, 2010 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=225435 BREAKING Nordyke: Order entered] September, 2009 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=215071 Nordyke: en banc Oral Arguments 9/24 10AM] August, 2009 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=207630 Volokh: Nordyke goes en banc] July, 2009 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=185619 Nordyke: 9th Request en banc Briefing] May, 2009 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=175296 Nordyke is out!] April, 2009 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=145478 Oral Arguments in landmark Nordyke v. King case - 100+ cal-gunners in attendance.] January, 2009 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=124203 Nordyke: Reply and Amicus Briefs] October, 2008 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=120437 Nordyke: 2A/14A Briefs are filed] September, 2008 | ||
+ | * [http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=111557 Nordyke: Important breaking news - same panel remains] July, 2008 | ||
+ | |||
+ | == Commentary and Analysis == | ||
+ | |||
+ | *Nov 28, 2011 - [http://www.mercurynews.com/crime-courts/ci_19427867? 9th Circuit agrees to rehear long-running Alameda County gun rights case] by Howard Mintz, MercuryNews.com | ||
+ | |||
+ | *May 3, 2011 - [http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/05/02/BASI1JAQ2A.DTL&tsp=1 Alameda County gun show backers suffer setback] by Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer, SFGate.com | ||
+ | |||
+ | *May 2, 2011 - [http://reason.com/blog/2011/05/02/the-legal-meaning-of-the-secon The Legal Meaning of the Second Amendment Further Clarified in Nordyke v. King] by Brian Doherty, ''Reason.com Online Blog'' | ||
+ | |||
+ | *May 2, 2011 - [http://www.law.com/jsp/ca/PubArticleCA.jsp?id=1202492744491 Circuit Won't Slam Door on Gun Ban Suit] by Ginny LaRoe, ''The Recorder, Law.com'' | ||
+ | |||
+ | *September 22, 2010 - [http://www.examiner.com/la-in-los-angeles/october-19th-nordyke-v-king-gun-rights-case-to-be-heard October 19th - Nordyke v King gun rights case to be heard.] by Charles Nichols, ''LA History 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'' | ||
+ | |||
+ | == 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.” [http://municipalcodes.lexisnexis.com/codes/alamedagen/_DATA/TITLE09/Chapter_9_12_FIREARMS_AND_DANG.html#11 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 [http://www.dklawoffice.com/ 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 <u>long</u> and convoluted history. | ||
− | The Ninth Circuit | + | ''The case was filed in 1999. It has been heard by the Ninth Circuit'' |
+ | ''[four] 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, [http://www.archive.org/download/gov.uscourts.caed.191444/gov.uscourts.caed.191444.27.0.pdf Document 27] filed in ''Pena v. Cid''</ref> | ||
− | + | '' | |
− | + | For a concise history lesson on this case, please read [http://www.calgunlaws.com/index.php/current-litigation/82-cases-litigation/905-crpa-foundation-files-amicus-brief-in-ninth-circuit-case-.html here] or [http://www.crpa.org/_e/page/1573/mr08_17_10.htm here] | |
− | = | + | [http://wiki.calgunsfoundation.org/index.php?title=Nordyke_v._King_Historical_Notes Old Nordyke v. King Wiki Historical Notes] |
− | + | == Notes == | |
+ | <small> | ||
+ | <references/> | ||
+ | </small> | ||
+ | ==External links== | ||
+ | *[http://www.chicagoguncase.com/ ChicagoGunCase] provides info about a closely-related case in the Seventh Circuit. | ||
+ | *[http://homepages.nyu.edu/~jmm257/mvc.html Maloney v. Rice: the Nunchaku Case] is a closely related case in the Second Circuit. |
Latest revision as of 18:05, 8 January 2013
Contents
Introduction
Nordyke v. King was challenging an effective ban on gun shows on county property by the county of Alameda.
Status
PACER case number 07-15763 filed in U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (San Francisco).
Nordyke VI
Nordyke v. King, 681 F. 3d 1041 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 2012
NORDYKE OPINION |
---|
January 8th, 2013: After 12 years of litigation, Nordyke v. King is finally over. The ruling did not impact the 2A right. Gun shows may be held on County property provided that the Nordykes' comply with the ordinance by tethering guns to tables like other merchandise at retail stores. The Nordykes' were not awarded prevailing party status by the court and despite petitioning the Supreme Court, fees and costs are not recoverable. |
- November 28, 2011: Chief Judge KOZINSKI issues an order to rehear the case en banc:
Upon the vote of a majority of nonrecused active judges, it is ordered that this case be reheard en banc pursuant to Circuit Rule 35-3. The three-judge panel opinion shall not be cited as precedent by or to any court of the Ninth Circuit. Judge Rawlinson did not participate in the deliberations or vote in this case.
- July 18, 2011, Appellants filed a Leave to file Reply Brief in Support of Rehearing for En Banc
- July 11, 2011, Appellees filed a response to Combo PFR Panel and En Banc rehearing.
- May 23, 2011 Request for rehearing and rehearing en banc
Nordyke V
- May 2, 2011 - Nordyke V Opinion is released. Nordyke loses and is sent back to district court to argue the second amendment claim. If no other action is taken, this will reset the timeline approximately another two years.
- October 19, 2010 - Oral Arguments heard at 1:30 PM at the James M. Browning Courthouse in San Francisco. Recording of the arguments here.
- September 13, 2010 Don filed a copy 28j letter calling the courts attention to the Anderson v. City of Hermosa Beach 1A case
- September 9, 2010 Oral arguments scheduled for October 19, 2010 at 1:30 PM at the James M. Browning Courthouse in San Francisco.
- August 18, 2010 - Multiple legal briefs filed in Nordyke v King
* 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 13, 2010 - Attorney Don Kilmer (representing Nordykes) filed a motion for supplemental briefing to the 3-judge panel.
Nordyke IV - VACATED -
- Nordyke v. King, 611 F. 3d 1015 - Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit 2010 Nordyke IV - VACATED
- 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.
- June 6, 2009 - The Nordykes have filed their en banc brief and a 28(j) letter discussing the 7th Circuit's ruling in NRA & McDonald v. Chicago.
- 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.
Nordyke IV
Nordyke III
Nordyke II
Nordyke I
Calguns discussions
- Nordyke v. King update: 9th Circuit to Rehear En Banc (Order Nov 28 2011)
- Nordyke: Request for Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc May, 2011
- NORDYKE OPINED MAY 2 May, 2011
- Nordyke III Audio is released: October, 2010
- NORDYKE III Orals. October, 2010
- Could Anderson v. Hermosa Beach (1A Tattoo shop victory) be relevant to Nordyke? September, 2010
- Oral arguments scheduled in Nordyke September, 2010
- MORE NORDYKE BRIEFS FILED August, 2010
- CGF Nordyke Amicus Brief - Ban limits supply - has no crime effect August, 2010
- Nordyke: En Banc Dismissed, Remanded to Panel July, 2010
- BREAKING Nordyke: Order entered September, 2009
- Nordyke: en banc Oral Arguments 9/24 10AM August, 2009
- Volokh: Nordyke goes en banc July, 2009
- Nordyke: 9th Request en banc Briefing May, 2009
- Nordyke is out! April, 2009
- Oral Arguments in landmark Nordyke v. King case - 100+ cal-gunners in attendance. January, 2009
- Nordyke: Reply and Amicus Briefs October, 2008
- Nordyke: 2A/14A Briefs are filed September, 2008
- Nordyke: Important breaking news - same panel remains July, 2008
Commentary and Analysis
- Nov 28, 2011 - 9th Circuit agrees to rehear long-running Alameda County gun rights case by Howard Mintz, MercuryNews.com
- May 3, 2011 - Alameda County gun show backers suffer setback by Bob Egelko, Chronicle Staff Writer, SFGate.com
- May 2, 2011 - The Legal Meaning of the Second Amendment Further Clarified in Nordyke v. King by Brian Doherty, Reason.com Online Blog
- May 2, 2011 - Circuit Won't Slam Door on Gun Ban Suit by Ginny LaRoe, The Recorder, Law.com
- September 22, 2010 - October 19th - Nordyke v King gun rights case to be heard. by Charles Nichols, LA History Examiner
- August 19, 2010 - SAF files amicus in Nordyke case; by Dave Workman, Seattle Gun Rights Examiner
- July 20, 2010 - The next gun rights battle is a turkey shoot by Charles Nichols, LA Anti-Establishment Examiner
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 [four] 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
- ChicagoGunCase provides info about a closely-related case in the Seventh Circuit.
- Maloney v. Rice: the Nunchaku Case is a closely related case in the Second Circuit.