Tags: nra | supreme | court | libertarian | guns

NRA, Libertarians Squabble over Supreme Court Case

Monday, 08 Feb 2010 02:12 PM

By Dan Weil

Share:
  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Print  
|  A   A  
  Copy Shortlink
The National Rifle Association is fighting with erstwhile libertarian allies over who should be arguing on behalf of gun owners in the next big Supreme Court case.

In the landmark 2008 case Heller v. District of Columbia, it was a group of libertarian lawyers who won the case without any help from the NRA. The Supreme Court ruled then that Washington, D.C.’s handgun ban was unconstitutional

Next month, the court will hear McDonald v. Chicago, which challenges a handgun ban in Chicago and its suburbs similar to the Washington rule struck down by the court two years ago.

The issue now is whether the Second Amendment offers protection against actions by state and local governments, not merely the feds.

The lawyer who will be arguing for gun holders is Alan Gura, who is affiliated with the libertarian Cato Institute and successfully argued the Heller case.

However, the Supreme Court, without explanation, gave the NRA permission to have its attorney offer arguments as well. The NRA’s recently hired lawyer Paul Clement, who was solicitor general in the George W. Bush administration, will take away a third of Gura’s time.

Needless to say, the libertarians aren’t too happy. Ilya Shapiro, a Supreme Court scholar at Cato Institute, told The Washington Post, "The NRA prefers to seek glory for itself rather than presenting the strongest case for its purported constituency of gun owners."

The NRA’s request for time at the podium was "about fundraising, not lawyering," he said.

In response NRA spokesman Andrew Arulanandam told The Post: "Our client is the Second Amendment. We wanted to make sure that all avenues were addressed and all bases covered."

Paul Valone, a Charlotte, N.C., gun owners advocate, sides with Gura. He wrote in the Charlotte Gun Rights Examiner, “As a betting man, I would rather place my money on a lawyer who already won the precedent-setting Second Amendment case rather than the lawyer who argued against him.”

© 2014 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

Share:
  Comment  |
   Contact Us  |
  Print  
  Copy Shortlink
Around the Web
Join the Newsmax Community
>> Register to share your comments with the community.
>> Login if you are already a member.
blog comments powered by Disqus
 
Email:
Retype Email:
Country
Zip Code:
 
Hot Topics
Follow Newsmax
Like us
on Facebook
Follow us
on Twitter
Add us
on Google Plus
Around the Web
You May Also Like

Russia Warns US against Further Sanctions as Ukraine Deal Stalls

Friday, 18 Apr 2014 20:23 PM

Russia said its military is massed on Ukraine's doorstep and warned against further US sanctions as a deal struck with W . . .

Sen. Corker: Time to Consider Sending Weapons to Ukraine

Friday, 18 Apr 2014 19:31 PM

It is time for the United States to provide lethal weapons for Ukraine's military, Sen. Bob Corker said Friday, and make . . .

Pope's Good Friday Message: 'Remember All the Abandoned People'

Friday, 18 Apr 2014 18:05 PM

The plight of immigrants, the poor, the sick, the elderly, unemployed and prisoners dominated Pope Francis' Good Friday  . . .

Newsmax, Moneynews, and Independent. American. are registered trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc. Newsmax TV, NewsmaxWorld, NewsmaxHealth, are trademarks of Newsmax Media, Inc.

 
NEWSMAX.COM
America's News Page
©  Newsmax Media, Inc.
All Rights Reserved