Monday, September 12, 2011

Kachalsky v. Cacace Appealed To 2nd Circuit Court Of Appeals

In a move that was expected, Alan Gura filed a notice of appeal with the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals in Kachalsky v. Cacace. This is the case challenging New York State's requirement to show "proper cause" for a pistol carry permit. From the docketing notice:
Date: September 12, 2011
Docket #: 11-3642
Short Title: Kachalsky v. Cacace
DC Docket #: 10-cv-5413
DC Court: SDNY (WHITE PLAINS)
DC Judge: Seibel

DOCKETING NOTICE

A notice of appeal filed by Alan Kachalsky, Christina Nikolov, Johnnie Nance, Anna Marcucci-Nance, Eric Detmer in the above referenced case was docketed today as 11-3642. This number must appear on all documents related to this case that are filed in this Court.
The notice of appeal consisted of Judge Seibel's decision in the case plus the docket history of the case from the District Court.
Posted by at
Labels: ,

3 comments:

  1. Meanwhile every pending gun case is going to get this decision cited by the gun banners.

    ReplyDelete

  2. Gura...how about challenging the license requirement...Unlike your move here, a winning argument, as the licensing of a right contained within the federal Bill of Rights has already been settled..
    Murdock v Penn 319 U.S. 105 (1943)
    "It is contended, however, that the fact that the license tax can suppress or control this activity is unimportant [319 U.S. 105, 113] if it does not do so. But that is to disregard the nature of this tax. It is a license tax – a flat tax imposed on the exercise of a privilege granted by the Bill of Rights. A state may not impose a charge for the enjoyment of a right granted by the federal constitution."

    Here, let me refresh your memory....It's a privilege to drive...thus the imposed license requirement...It's not a privilege to carry a gun, it's a right...thus the government can't impose a license requirement...Did you forget this basic doctrine already?

    I would suspect that if you showed any of your numerous clients the Murdock v Penn case, they would finish reading it and turn to you to say, " What the hell are you doing? "

    ReplyDelete

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)