Nordyke v. King
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>
This case is case number 07-15763 filed in U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit (San Francisco).
FUTURE EVENTS We are waiting for a ruling from the 3-judge panel. There is no set "date" for the opinion to be released The opinion will probably be published sometime in Q1 of 2011.
- 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.
- 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.
- April 20, 2009 - Opinion of the court
- 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
- 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
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>