2016 National Lawyers Convention
The Supreme Court's 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller recognized for the first time in our history that individual Americans have a right to gun ownership. Justice Scalia's opinion in Heller is widely regarded as a signal success for his originalist approach to constitutional interpretation. This panel will assess Heller's contribution to the law. How originalist was the opinion? Have the lower courts been faithful in applying Heller to issues outside its narrow holding? Is the Court likely to read Heller broadly or narrowly in the future?
This panel was held on November 18, 2016, during the 2016 National Lawyers Convention in Washington, DC.
Civil Rights: The Second Amendment: Enforcing the Heller Decision
12:30 p.m. – 2:45 p.m.
- Mr. Noel J. Francisco, Partner, Jones Day
- Prof. Nelson Lund, University Professor, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
- Prof. Michael O'Shea, Professor of Law, Oklahoma City University School of Law
- Prof. Allan Rostron, University of Missouri - Kansas City Law School
- Moderator: Hon. Raymond M. Kethledge, U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit
- Introduction: Hon. Gail Heriot, Professor of Law, University of San Diego School of Law
The Mayflower Hotel Civil Rights Practice Group Podcast
Nelson Lund April 14, 2016
In a per curiam opinion issued on March 21, 2016, the Supreme Court vacated and remanded a decision by the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts upholding a state law prohibiting the possession of stun guns, finding that the decision was inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago. Justices Alito and Thomas issued a concurring opinion which would have gone further in finding the Massachusetts statute unconstitutional. Our expert discussed the case and its implications for the Court’s Second Amendment jurisprudence going forward.
Civil Rights and Criminal Law & Procedure Practice Group Podcast
- Prof. Nelson Lund, University Professor, George Mason University School of Law
In July, the Illinois State Rifle Association filed an emergency motion for an injunction to bar the state from enforcing the ban on carrying firearms in public. On Thursday, October 3, 2013, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments over the injunction request. David Thompson, who argued the case before a three-judge panel including Judge Richard Posner, joined us on a Teleforum conference call to speak about ongoing litigation on gun rights in the 7th circuit.
- Mr. David H. Thompson, Managing Partner, Cooper & Kirk PLLC
- Moderator: Mr. Dean A. Reuter, Vice President and Director of Practice Groups, The Federalist Society
[Listen now!] Criminal Law & Procedure Practice Group Podcast
On September 12, 2013, the Illinois State Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in People v. Aguilar striking down a section of the state's Aggravated Unlawful Use of Weapons statue as unconstitutional, saying that it violates the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The court drew upon the U.S. Supreme Court opinions in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, as well as the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals’ 2012 ruling in Moore v. Madigan. Our expert will provide analysis and discussion of the opinion.
- Prof. Nelson Lund, Professor of Law, George Mason University School of Law
- Moderator: Dean Reuter, Vice President and Director of Practice Groups, The Federalist Society
Mandatory Liability Insurance for Firearm Owners: Design Choices and Second Amendment Limits Engage Volume 14, Issue 1 February 2013
Some twenty-five years ago, one of us sketched out a rationale for using mandatory liability insurance rules as an alternative to common forms of direct government regulation of firearms. Until recently, this possibility attracted almost no attention, but it is now being considered as a response to the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. The time thus seems right to explore the subject in somewhat more depth, with an eye especially to design features that would be needed to minimize interference with the constitutional right to keep and bear arms....[Read More!]