The appellants from Nordyke v. King have filed an amicus curiae brief [pdf] in support of McDonald v. Chicago.
My notes from the original verdict are here. As expected, the decision at hand created a circuit split. An order was filed to remand the verdict for a rehearing by the full 9th Circuit, who decided to shelve the matter pending the outcome of McDonald v. Chicago.
Their brief for McDonald not only argues that incorporation is necessary and prudent, but that the Supreme Court must establish a unilateral standard of review so as to give guidance to lower courts in deciding future litigation.
The original Nordyke verdict suggested strict scrutiny, as did the 7th Circuit in this week’s Skoien decision.
The current brief is more specific:
An opinion in the McDonald case that incorporates the Second Amendment against the states, but which also includes a holding that all laws regulating the “right to keep and bear arms” must be uniform within each state serves the following functions: (1) Since firearms are ubiquitous, exercising the right to possess firearms should not conflict with the right of intrastate travel; (2) law-abiding firearm owners need only acquaint themselves with federal and state laws, instead of being held criminally accountable in every town, city, county, and parish they travel through within their state while exercising a fundamental right; and (3) instead of the municipal codes of tens of thousands of cities and counties being subjected to challenges under the Second Amendment, a constitutionally recognized, baseline preemption of “the right to keep and bear arms” that funnels down those challenges to the bodies of law of 50 states plus one federal body of law, strangles the majority of potential lawsuits in their crib.
Continued...