data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/1ad50/1ad5019876df34737b0f35aa75b700bcc2dd795d" alt=""
Yesterday, the Supreme Court granted the NRA time to argue for the Plaintiffs in the case. It is interesting to note that the Plaintiffs in the McDonald case are represented by Alan Gura, the same attorney who argued the case for the Plaintiffs in Heller. It is also interesting to note that Gura opposed allowing the NRA to argue on behalf of the Plaintiffs case. While both Gura and the NRA want the gun ban overturned, they have different arguments in trying to advance the cause. Gura is advancing a privileges or immunities clause argument for applying the Second Amendment to the states whereas the NRA is arguing a traditional due process clause argument for application of the Second Amendment to the states. The attorney representing the NRA, Paul Clement, was solicitor general in 2007 and filed a brief in favor of upholding the Washington D.C. gun ban.
For more information about the Chicago criminal defense attorneys at Legal Defenders, P.C., visit us at www.thelegaldefenders.com or call us anytime at 1-800-228-7295.
No comments:
Post a Comment