Don't ask, don't tell for a little while longer

Yesterday, the Supreme Court refused to hear a challenge to the U.S. military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy regarding gays serving their country in the military. Click here to read more on the subject.

Guns and Judges

In District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S. Ct. 2783 (2008), the Supreme Court held that a District of Columbia ban on handguns was unconstitutional. In National Rifle Association, v. City of Chicago, the Supreme Court is taking another look at the Second Amendment. This time the NRA petitioner is arguing that the Second Amendment has been incorporated into the Due Process or Privileges and Immunities Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment; therefore, state bans on handguns are also unconstitutional. If the Court agrees, various state ordinances prohibiting or restricting possession of hand guns will be found unconstitutional, or on shaky constitutional ground.

On a related note, some have characterized Sotomayor as an anti-gun activist due to her recent decision in Maloney v. Cuomo, 554 F.3d 56 (2009) that a New York ban on nunchuka did not violate the Second Amendment.

...Having Easterbrook and Posner on her team should help a little.

Finally, for those of you interested in reading more about the Second Amendment, here are a few titles available in the Law Library:

• The mythic meanings of the Second Amendment : taming political violence in a constitutional republic by David C. Williams [KF4558 2nd .W55 2003]


• Gun violence in America : the struggle for control by Alexander DeConde [ HV7436 .D43 2001]


• The right to bear arms : rights and liberties under the law by Robert J. Spitzer [KF3941 .S68 2001

And some history on this and other NRA petitions, and links to court documents filed around the same time is available on SCOTUS.

Update for anyone following Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Obama (aka Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. Bush)

On May 22, 2009, Judge Walker issued an order to show cause why the government should not be sanctioned for failing to provide to plaintiffs' attorneys (those who qualify for TS/SCI clearances) information pertinent to the action, or agreeing to terms in a proposed protective order (and failing to offer a protective order of its own for consideration). The sanctions would prohibit the government from contesting its alleged liability.

On May 29,2009, the government filed its response arguing that it has not engaged in sanctionable conduct.