Tuesday, July 3, 2018

President Trump's SCOTUS List, Part 3


These next five potential nominees include the only non-judge on the list - Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) and the only District Court or non-appellate level judge on the list - Federico Moreno of the Southern District of Florida. My gut feeling is that only Sen. Mike Lee might make the short list if President Trump rolls the dice and takes the chance that a few Democrats will support one of their own colleagues.

One thing I have noticed is that both Joan Larsen and Mike Lee were associates at Sidley Austin at the same time period that our favorite 2A attorney, Alan Gura, was an associate there.

Joan L. Larsen

Personal: 
49 y.o., married to Adam Pritchard who is a professor of law at the University of Michigan Law School, and has two children.

Current Position: 
Judge, 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. Nominated by Pres. Donald Trump and confirmed Nov. 1, 2017.

Education: 
University of Northern Iowa, B.A., Summa Cum Laude, 1990
Northwestern University School of Law, J.D., 1st in class, 1993

Clerkships: 
Judge David B. Sentelle, U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, 1993-1994
Justice Antonin Scalia, Supreme Court of the United State, 1994-1995

Previous Positions: 
Associate, Sidley Austin LLP, Washington, DC, 1995-1997
Visiting Asst Prof., Northwestern University School of Law, 1998
Visiting Prof of Law, University of Michigan School of Law, 1998-2001
Dep. Asst. Attorney General, Office of Legal Counsel, US Department of Justice, 2002-2003
Lecturer in Law & Adjunct Prof., University of Michigan School of Law, 2003-present
Visiting Asst Prof., University of Iowa School of Law, 2006
Associate Justice, Michigan Supreme Court, 2015-2017

Scholarship: 
Of Propensity, Prejudice, and Plain Meaning: The Accused's Use of Exculpatory Specific Acts Evidence and the Need to Amend Rule 404(b), 87 Nw. U. L. Rev. 651 (1993)
One Person One Office: Separation of Powers or Separation of Personnel, 79 Cornell L. Rev. 1045 (1993-1994)
Constitutionalism without Courts, 94 Nw. U. L. Rev. 983 (2000)
Importing Constitutional Norms from a Wider Civilization: Lawrence and the Rehnquist Court's Use of Foreign and International Law in Domestic Constitutional Interpretation, 65 Ohio St. L.J. 1283 (2004)
Ancient Juries and Modern Judges: Originalism’s Uneasy Relationship with the Jury, 71 Ohio St. L.J 959 (2010)
Incompatibility Clause in The Heritage Guide to the Constitution, 2nd Ed. (2014)

Judicial Opinions: 
For a review of her judicial decisions, see this the blog post from The Vetting Room and this profile from the SCOTUSBlog. Her record on the Michigan Supreme Court tends to be conservative but has voted with the more liberal justices. Since Larsen has been on the 6th Circuit, she participated in eight cases with a published opinion and 28 cases with an unpublished opinion. The cases involved a variety of criminal issues, disability cases, immigration appeals, and financial transactions. None involved any issue concerning the Second Amendment.

Opposition: 
The opposition from the Alliance for Justice is centered on Larsen's scholarship and her time with the Office of Legal Counsel. They accuse Larsen of siding with the wealthy and powerful over the rights of workers while on the 6th Circuit. Interestingly, they ignore a case where she found for a union instead of the non-union worker along with another case where she found the administrative law judge had improperly denied disability benefits. I'd say they engaged in cherry-picking to come to their conclusion. People for the American Way (sic) say in a letter opposing Larsen when she was nominated for the 6th Circuit accused her of being someone who would "diminish the rights of ordinary Americans and enable dangerous abuses of power by the president."

Michael S. "Mike" Lee

Personal: 
47 y.o., married to Sharon Burr Lee, and has three children. Mormon. His father, Rex Lee, was US Solicitor General during the Reagan Administration and later was the 10th President of BYU. Is the younger brother of Thomas R. Lee. Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) is a second cousin.

Current Position: 
United State Senator representing Utah. First elected in 2010. 
Education 

:
Brigham Young University, BA, 1994
Brigham Young University J. Reuben Clark School of Law, JD, 1997

Clerkships: 
Judge Dee Benson, US District Court for the District of Utah, 1997-1998
Justice Samuel Alito, Supreme Court of the United States, 1998-1999

Previous Positions: 
Associate, Sidley Austin, Washington, DC, 1999-2002
Asst. US Attorney, District of Utah, 2002-2005
General Counsel, Office of Gov. Jon Huntsman, Salt Lake City, UT, 2005-2006
Partner, Howrey LLP, Salt Lake City,UT, 2006-2010

Scholarship: 
The Freedom Agenda: Why a Balanced Budget Amendment is Necessary to Restore Constitutional Government (2011)
Why John Roberts Was Wrong About Healthcare: A Conservative Critique of The Supreme Court's Obamacare Ruling (2013)
Our Lost Constitution: The Willful Subversion of America's Founding Document (2015)
Written Out of History: The Forgotten Founders Who Fought Big Government (2017)

Opposition: 
The National Review said if Mike Lee was picked he would be hard to "Bork" as he has a long record of bipartisanship. He has co-sponsored bills with 36 out of the 49 sitting Democrats in the Senate including Chuck Schumer, Kamala Harris, Cory Booker, Dick Durbin, and Elizabeth Warren. If selected, Lee would be the 16th senator to sit on the Supreme Court and the first since Hugo Black. Lee has a solid conservative record from all the usual sources which upsets the opposition. The Alliance for Justice says, "Senator Lee’s views of the Constitution are radically conservative, even when compared with the record of his former boss Justice Alito. Like D.C. Circuit Judge Janice Rogers Brown, Lee is part of a movement of the wealthy and powerful to restore the “Lochner era” and use the Constitution as pretext to roll back progress made on economic and social rights throughout the 20th century."

Thomas R. Lee

Personal: 
53 y.o., married to Kimberly Lee, and has six children. Mormon. His father, Rex Lee, was US Solicitor General during the Reagan Administration and later was the 10th President of BYU. Is the younger brother of Sen. Mike Lee. Sen. Tom Udall (D-NM) is a second cousin.
Current Position: Associate Chief Justice, Utah Supreme Court. Appointed to the court by Gov. Gary Herbert in 2010.

Education: 
Brigham Young University, BA Summa Cum Laude, 1988
University of Chicago Law School, JD, 1991

Clerkships: 
Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III, 4th Circuit Court of Appeals, 1991-1992
Justice Clarence Thomas, Supreme Court of the United States, 1994-1995
Previous Positions:
Shareholder, Kimball, Parr, Waddoups, Brown & Gee, Salt Lake City, UT, 1995-1997
Of Counsel, Howard Phillips & Andersen, Salt Lake City, UT, 1997-2004, 2005-2010
Rex and Maureen Rawlinson Professor of Law, Brigham Young University J. Reuben Clark School of Law, 1997-2010 (on leave 2004-2005)
Dep. Asst. Attorney General, Civil Division, US Department of Justice, 2004-2005
Distinguished Lecturer, Brigham Young University J. Reuben Clark School of Law, 2010- Present

Scholarship: 
Comment: The Standing of Qui Tam Relators Under the False Claims Act, 57 U.Chi. L.Rev. 542 (1990)
Pleading and Proof: The Economics of Legal Burdens, 1997 BYU L. Rev. 1 (1997)
Stare Decisis in Historical Perspective: From the Founding Era to the Rehnquist Court, 52 Vand. L. Rev. 647 (1999)
Stare Decisis in Economic Perspective: An Economic Analysis of the Supreme Court's Doctrine of Precedent, 78 N.C. L. Rev. 643 (2000)
In Rem Jurisdiction in Cyberspace, 75 Wash. L. Rev 97 (2000)
The Anastasoff Case and the Judicial Power to "Unpublish" Opinions, 77 Notre Dame L.Rev. 135 (2001)
Preliminary Injunctions and the Status Quo, 58 Wash. & Lee L. Rev. 109 (2001)
The Original Understanding of the Census Clause: Statistical Estimates and the Constitutional Requirement of an 'Actual Enumeration', 77 Wash. L. Rev. 1 (2001)
“To Promote the Progress of Science”: The Copyright Clause and Congress's Power to Extend Copyrights (with Orrin Hatch), 16 Harv. J.L. & Tech. 1 (2002)
Demystifying Dilution, 84 B.U. L. Rev. 859 (2004)
Abercrombie Unveiled: A Theoretical and Empirical Analysis of Trademark Distinctiveness, Working Draft, SSRN 1319409 (2008)
Sophistication, Bridging the Gap, and the Likelihood of Confusion: An Empirical and Theoretical Analysis, https://ssrn.com/abstract=1319188, (2008)
Trademarks, Consumer Psychology, and the Sophisticated Consumer, 57 Emory L.J. 575 (2008)
Judicial Activism, Restraint, & the Rule of Law, 26 Utah Bar J. 12 (2013)
Corpus Linguistics & Original Public Meaning: A New Tool To Make Originalism More Empirical (with Stephen C. Mouritsen), 126 Yale L.J. Forum 21 (2016)
Judging Ordinary Meaning, 127 Yale L.J. 788 (2018)
Data-Driven Originalism, U. Pa. L. Rev. (forthcoming)

Judicial Opinions: 
With regard to Lee and the Second Amendment, the SCOTUSBlog had this to say:
During Lee’s time on the Utah Supreme Court, he has had only few cases dealing, albeit indirectly, with the rights of gun owners, and it is difficult to glean much about his position on the scope of the Second Amendment from those cases. The case most directly on point is Herland v. Izatt, a 2015 lawsuit against a gun owner who allowed an intoxicated woman to hold his loaded handgun. The woman then accidentally, but fatally, shot herself in the head. Lee joined the other members of his court in holding that the lawsuit could go forward. The court, in an opinion by Chief Justice Matthew Durrant, acknowledged that the “right to bear arms is enshrined in both the United States and Utah Constitutions. But with that right,” the court continued, “comes responsibilities,” and the state legislature has placed some restrictions on gun use and ownership – for example, by enacting a bar on supplying guns to children and people with mental illnesses. For that reason, the court concluded, gun owners have a duty “to exercise reasonable care in supplying their guns to intoxicated individuals.” However, the court cautioned, that duty “does not mean that” gun owners “will necessarily be liable for damages when those individuals injure themselves, because in most cases the intoxicated individual’s negligence will likely exceed that of the gun owner as a matter of comparative negligence.”
Lee also takes a narrow view of the deference courts should give to agency interpretations of laws and regulations. He said that the courts have the prerogative of interpreting the law. Lee is also a very strong originalist
Opposition: 
Last year when President Trump was deciding on the replacement for Justice Scalia, a group of academics did an empirical study as to which potential nominee would be the closest to Scalia in judicial philosophy. They said it was Lee. If you look at his body of scholarship above, I think you can see why. The SCOTUSBlog said Lee had a "storied legal background".  As to opposition, the Alliance for Justice, not surprisingly, thinks he's a bad choice based on Utah Supreme Court decision dealing with reproductive rights, criminal justice, employee rights, and the environment. I'm surprised they didn't go after him for just being a Mormon.

Edward M. Mansfield

Personal: 
61 y.o., married to Elizabeth Hall-Mansfield, and has three children. 
Current Position: 
Associate Justice, Supreme Court of Iowa. Appointed by Gov. Terry Branstad in 2011 to replace a justice recalled by Iowa voters. Returned to the court by voters in 2012. 
Education: 
Harvard University, AB, 1978
Yale University Law School, JD, 1982 
Clerkships: 
Judge Patrick Higginbotham, 5th Circuit Court of Appeals, 1982-1983 
Previous Positions: 
Private Practice, undisclosed law firm, Phoenix, AZ, 1983-1996
Partner, Belin McCormick, Des Moines, IA, 1996-2009
Iowa Court of Appeals, 2009-2011
Adjunct Prof of Law, Drake University, 1997 - present. 
Judicial Opinions: 
To my knowledge, Mansfield has not ruled on a gun rights case. He did rule in 2015 against the Iowa State Patrol in an asset forfeiture case and remanded the case back to district court. The person involved did get his money returned. His perhaps most controversial case involved a dentist firing an assistant for being "too attractive". The dentist fired the assistant when his wife learned the two, both married, were texting back and forth after hours and demanded she be fired. He found that the assistant had not been fired because of her gender but to save his marriage. There was no claim of a hostile work environment or sexual harassment. Mansfield said they weren't asked to determine if the dentist treated the assistant badly in firing her but only whether it was unlawful sexual discrimination and it wasn't under Iowa or Federal law. Mansfield dissented in a case this past Friday where the Iowas Supreme Court struck down a law that required a mandatory 72 hour waiting period before having an abortion. 
Opposition: 
There seems to be no real opposition to Mansfield by the Alliance for Justice. I'm guessing that they don't consider him to be that likely to be picked by Pres. Trump.

Federico Moreno

Personal: 
66 y.o, married to Maria Cristina Morales, and has three children. His daughter Christina is an Asst US Attorney in the Southern District of Florida. Moreno was born in Caracas, Venezuela. Catholic. 
Current Position: 
Judge, US District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Nominated by Pres. George H.W. Bush and confirmed July 16, 1990. 
Education: 
University of Notre Dame, B.A., 1974
University of Miami School of Law, J.D., 1978 
Previous Positions: 
Private practice, Miami, Florida, 1978-1979
Assistant federal public defender, Southern District of Florida, 1979-1981
Private practice, Miami, Florida, 1982-1986
Judge, Dade County [Florida] Court, 1986-1987
Judge, Circuit Court of Florida, Eleventh Judicial Circuit, 1987-1990 
Judicial Opinions: 
Moreno has heard more that 5,000 cases in his time on the bench. One of his most notable ones involved ruling against the Coast Guard who had returned 15 refugees to Cuba under the "wet foot-dry foot" policy. The 15 were found standing on the piling of a former bridge in the Florida Keys. The USCG and the government argued that the pilings were "rooted in the water" and not part of Florida. Moreno disagreed and ordered the government to do what was necessary to allow these 15 to return to the US as refugees. As to Second Amendment cases, I really didn't find any. 
Opposition: 
The Alliance for Justice doesn't seem to be overly concerned about Judge Moreno. I believe his age - 66 - and his position as a District Court judge make it highly unlikely that he'll make the final short list.

A Reminder For Dog Owners On The 4th


I've had dogs that were not gun shy in the least who hated either fireworks or thunder. With all the noise of freedom that will be going off tomorrow, you may want to make sure your dog is in a safe, secure environment.


Sunday, July 1, 2018

President Trump's SCOTUS List, Part 2


This continues the thumbnails on the potential nominee to succeed Justice Anthony Kennedy on the Supreme Court of the United States. Part 1 had Judge Amy Coney Barrett, GA Justice Keith Blackwell, FL Chief Justice Charles Canady, Judge Steven Colloton, and Judge Allison Eid. As with Part 1, I'm particularly interested in how these potential nominees will impact gun rights and the Second Amendment.

Three of the judges - Hardiman, Kavanaugh, and Kethledge - are considered to be short listed. Hardiman who was widely considered the runner-up to Justice Neil Gorsuch and Kethledge were both on the first short list and virtually all mentions of a current short list include Kavanaugh.

Britt Grant

Personal:
40 y.o., married to Justin Grant who worked for the CIA, and has two sons and a daughter. Baptist.
Current Position: Associate Justice, Georgia Supreme Court. Appointed in 2017 by Gov. Nathan Deal. Currently also a Trump nominee for the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals
Education:
Wake Forest University, BA Summa Cum Laude, 2000
Stanford University Law School, JD, 2007

Clerkships:
Judge Brett M. Kavanaugh, US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, 2007-2008

Previous Positions:
Office of Rep. Nathan Deal, 2000-2001
Exec. Asst. to Director, Domestic Policy Council, The White House, 2001-2002
Spec. Asst to Director, USA Freedom Corps, The White House, 2002-2003
Dep. Assoc. Director, Office of Cabinet Affairs, The White House, 2003-2004
Associate - Commercial Litigation, Kirkland and Ellis LLP, Washington, DC, 2008-2012
Counsel for Legal Policy, Georgia Attorney General's Office, 2012-2014
Solicitor General of Georgia, 2015-2016

Judicial Opinions:
You can find what she considers her most important decisions in the questionnaire that she submitted to the Senate Judiciary Committee when she was nominated for a seat on the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. More importantly, for our purposes, as Solictor General she joined the amicus brief submitted by 24 states in Friedman v. City of Highland Park asking the US Supreme Court to take the case. This case involved Highland Park's assault weapons ban. Unfortunately, the Supreme Court did not grant certiorari. She also successfully litigated a water rights case, Florida v. Georgia, that was heard by the Supreme Court under its original jurisdiction which is very, very rare.

Opposition:
The Alliance for Justice asserts that Grant is an "elitist" and is unfit for any Federal judgeship due to being too young and inexperienced. One of the things they objected to was her challenge to ObamaCare. I'm sure they also object to her activities on behalf of The Federalist Society where she has been active since her time in law school. 


Raymond W. Gruender

Personal:
55 y.o. (this week), married to Judy Gruender, no children. Was the victim of an attempted murder-suicide when his father gathered Gruender and his siblings for a group photo. The father than shot Gruender and his teenage sister before killing himself. Catholic.

Current Position:
Judge, 8th Circuit Court of Appeals. Appointed by Pres. George W. Bush and confirmed May 20, 2004

Education:
Washington University in St. Louis, B.A., 1984
Washington University School of Law, J.D., 1987
Washington University in St. Louis, M.B.A., 1987

Previous Positions:
Associate, Lewis, Rice and Fingersh, St. Louis, MO, 1987-1990
Assistant U.S. attorney, Eastern District of Missouri, 1990-1994
Partner, Thompson Coburn, St. Louis, MO, 1994-2000
Assistant U.S. attorney, Eastern District of Missouri,2000-2001
U.S. attorney for the Eastern District of Missouri, 2001-2004

Judicial Opinions:
Given that Judge Gruender has served on the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals for a number of years, he has participated in a number of decisions involving abortion, contraception, voting rights, criminal rights, etc. The SCOTUSBlog covers the major ones here. With regard to the Second Amendment, there were no notable cases. While he served as US Attorney, he did aggressively prosecute gun violations, presumably felons in possession, in Missouri according to former Sen. Kit Bond in Gruender's confirmation hearing.

Opposition:
It would seem in reading the opposition comments on Gruender that the most significant opposition to him will come from the pro-abortion lobby. In an early decision (2006), he dissented in a case from South Dakota that the 8th Circuit overturned a law requiring the doctor to inform the woman the terminating the pregnancy will end the life of a unique human being. He also wrote the decision that overturned the Missouri law that precluded their DMV from issuing license plates that read "Choose Life" on First Amendment grounds.


Thomas M. Hardiman

Personal:
53 y.o. (next week), married to Lori Zappala Hardiman, and has three children. First in his family to attend college and worked as a taxi driver throughout high school and college. His brother-in-law, Stephen Zappala Jr. is the District Attorney of Allegheny County (Pittsburgh), PA. Catholic.

Current Position
:

Judge, 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals. Nominated by Pres. George W. Bush. Confirmed March 15, 2007.

Education:
University of Notre Dame, B.A., 1987
Georgetown University Law Center, J.D., Editor, Law Review, 1990

Previous Positions:
Associate, Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher and Flom, Washington, DC, 1990-92
Associate and Partner, Titus and McConomy, Pittsburgh, PA, 1992-1999
Partner, Reed Smith, Pittsburgh, PA, 1999-2003
Judge, U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania, 2003-2007


Judicial Opinions:
Hardiman has the strongest record on the Second Amendment of all the potential nominees. He had a strong dissent in Drake v. Filko which challenged New Jersey's may-issue carry laws. He said, in essence, "opining that the majority misreads Heller and McDonald, the Second Amendment applies outside the home, and New Jersey's law conditioning issuance of a permit to carry a handgun in public on a showing of justifiable need contravenes the Second Amendment." Hardiman also concurred in the Binderup case regarding the denial of the Second Amendment rights to those convicted of non-violent misdemeanors.

He wrote in his concurrence:
By contrast, we would hold—consistent with Heller—that non-dangerous persons convicted of offenses unassociated with violence may rebut the presumed constitutionality of § 922(g)(1) on an as-applied basis, and that when a law eviscerates the core of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms (as § 922(g)(1) does by criminalizing exercise of the right entirely), it is categorically unconstitutional.

Opposition:
The Alliance for Justice noted that Hardiman takes an expansive view of the Second Amendment, that he ruled in favor of the Little Sisters of the Poor in a case involving ObamaCare, and that he was a longtime member of the Federalist Society. While bad in their eyes, sounds good to me. That said, there are some on the right (RedState's Erick Erickson) who think Hardiman will be Souter 2.0 even though he has been reliably conservative.


Brett M. Kavanaugh

Personal:
53 y.o., married to Ashley Estes Kavanaugh (who was Personal Secretary to Pres. George W. Bush), and has two daughters. Catholic.

Current Position:
Judge, US Circuit of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Nominated by Pres. George W. Bush. Confirmed May 26, 2006

Education:
Yale College, B.A., 1987
Yale Law School, J.D., 1990

Clerkships:
Judge Walter K. Stapleton, US Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit, 1990-1991
Judge Alex Kosinski, US Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit, 1991-1992
Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, Supreme Court of the United States, 1993-1994

Previous Positions
:

Attorney, Office of the Solicitor General, U.S. Department of Justice, 1992-1993
Associate independent counsel, Whitewater investigation, 1994-1997, 1998
Partner, Kirkland and Ellis, Washington, DC, 1997-1998 and 1999-2001
Associate Counsel to the President, The White House, 2001-2003
Senior Assoc. Counsel to the President, The White House, 2003
Assistant to the President and Staff Secretary, The White House, 2003-2006

Scholarship:
Defense Presence and Participation: A Procedural Minimum for Batson v. Kentucky Hearings, 99 Yale L.J. 187 (1989-1990)
The President and the Independent Counsel, 86 Geo. L.J. 2133 (1997-1998)
Separation of Powers During the Forty-Fourth Presidency and Beyond, 93 Minn. L. Rev. 1454 (2009)
A Dialogue with Federal Judges on the Role of History in Interpretation, 80 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 1889 (2011-2012)
Our Anchor for 225 Years and Counting: The Enduring Significance of the Precise Text of the Constitution, 89 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1907 (2014)
The Courts and the Administrative State, 64 Case W. Res. L. Rev. 711 (2014)
Fixing Statutory Interpretation, 129 Harv. L. Rev. 2118 (2015)
The Judge as Umpire: Ten Principles, 65 Cath. U. L. Rev. 683 (2015)
Co-Author, Law of Judicial Precedent, 2016
Two Challenges for the Judge as Umpire: Statutory Ambiguity and Constitutional Exceptions, 92 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1907 (2017)

Judicial Opinions:
It is estimated that Kavanaugh has written well over 275 opinion in his years on the Court of Appeals. He filed a dissent in Heller II which challenged gun registration and the AWB in DC. Because of the nature of the DC Circuit, Kavanaugh has written many opinions that deal with agencies and regulation. The SCOTUSBlog says he tends to take a case-by-case approach to administrative law without resorting to a full frontal challenge on Chevron deference. Nonetheless, he has worked to keep the administrative state in check especially with some of the rules promulgated by the Obama-era EPA. The SCOTUSBlog says, "To Kavanaugh, if Congress has not spoken on a matter of deep economic and political significance, which it had not in this instance, a regulation challenged under the relevant statute is presumed to be invalid."

Opposition:
The Alliance for Justice in a bit of hyperbole says that a Kavanaugh nomination would "threaten the rights of consumers, workers, and immigrants, as well as women’s reproductive rights and protections for clean air and clean water." Kavanaugh's confirmation to the DC Circuit was held up for three years due to his being the principal author of the Starr Report which eventually led to Pres. Bill Clinton's impeachment (but not conviction). I'm sure the Clinton true believers will continue to hold this against him.

Raymond M. Kethledge

Personal:
52 y.o., married to Jessica Kethledge, and has both a son and daughter. Outdoorsman who hunts and fishes in Michigan's North Woods. Grandfather, Raymond W. Ketchledge, helped developed the acoustic anti-submarine torpedo during WWII. 
Current Position:
Judge, 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. Nominated by Pres. George W. Bush. Confirmed on June 24, 2008.

Education:
University of Michigan, B.A., 1989
University of Michigan Law School, J.D., 1993 
Clerkships:
Judge Ralph B. Guy, Jr., U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, 1993-1994
Justice Anthony Kennedy, Supreme Court of the United States, 1997-1998 
Previous Positions:
Judiciary counsel, U.S. Sen. Spencer Abraham, Michigan, 1995-1997
Partner, Honigman, Miller, Schwartz & Cohn, Detroit, MI, 1998-2001
Counsel, Ford Motor Company, 2001-2002
Partner, Feeney, Kellet, Wienner & Bush, Bloomfield, MI, 2002
Co-Founder and Partner, Bush, Seyferth & Paige, Troy, MI, 2003-2008

Scholarship:
U.S. Supreme Court Review: October 1998 Term, 78 Mich. B.J. 1314 (1999)
Co-Author, Lead Yourself First: Inspiring Leadership Through Solitude (2017)
Ambiguities and Agency Cases: Reflections after (Almost) Ten Years on the Bench, 70 Vand. L. Rev. En Banc 315 (2017)

Judicial Opinions:
With regard to the Second Amendment, the major case Kethledge participated in was an en banc hearing of Tyler v. Hillsdale County Sheriffs Department which found that person who had been committed years earlier had the right to have their gun rights restored. Kethledge joined in a concurring opinion supporting the decision. Other notable decisions by Kethledge include EEOC v. Kaplan in which he wrote the unanimous decision affirming the lower court's decision throwing out an expert's testimony in a disparate impact case. The Wall Street Journal called it the Opinion of the Year. Another notable decision, US v. NorCal Tea Party Patriots, in which he wrote, "Among the most serious allegations a federal court can address are that an Executive agency has targeted citizens for mistreatment based on their political views. No citizen—Republican or Democrat, socialist or libertarian—should be targeted or even have to fear being targeted on those grounds." He concluded by noting the IRS's attorney were engaged in a selective manner and he expected them to do better.

Opposition:
The Alliance for Justice certainly doesn't like Raymond Kethledge. They accuse him of wanting to "threaten the rights of consumers, workers, and immigrants, as well as women’s reproductive rights and the rights of the accused. He fights for the wealthy and powerful over the rights of all, attacking critical federal agencies that protect workers, consumers and the environment." I presume they are angry because Kethledge jacked up the IRS over their treatment of a Tea Party group.

Saturday, June 30, 2018

President Trump's SCOTUS List, Part 1


Now that Justice Anthony Kennedy has announced his retirement from the Supreme Court, President Trump has the opportunity to solidify the conservative majority on the court. Kennedy was often seen as a swing vote and his replacement will, most likely, be more in the mold of a Neil Gorsuch than a Justice Kennedy.

Yesterday, President Trump said that he will make his pick known on July 9th. He also announced that he had shortened the list from the original 25 down to five. The five on the short list include two women. He did not announce who had made the cut to his short list. The early speculation on the short list included  Circuit Court of Appeals Judges Brett Kavanaugh, Amal Thapur, Amy Coney Barrett, Thomas Hardiman, and Raymond Kethledge. Obviously, if there are two women on the short list as indicated by the President this early speculative list is incorrect.

Thus, rather than get into the guessing game, I plan to outline what we know about the 25 in a series of five posts. Beyond their education and work history, I am most interested in what they've said or may have written about gun rights and the Second Amendment. The easiest way to break down the list is by alphabetical order.

Amy Coney Barrett

Personal:
46 y.o., married to Jesse Barrett, an AUSA for Northern Indiana, 7 children. Roman Catholic. 
Current Position:Judge, 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, appointed by Pres. Donald Trump, confirmed Oct. 31, 2017 
Education:
Rhodes College, BA, 1994
Univ. of Notre Dame Law School, JD summa cum laude, law review, 1997 
Clerkships:
Judge Laurence Silberman, US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, 1997-1998
Justice Antonin Scalia, Supreme Court of the United States, 1998-1999 
Previous Positions:Associate, Miller, Cassidy, Larroca & Lewin, Washington, DC., 1999-2001
Adjunct Prof., George Washington University Law School, 2001-2002
John M. Olin Fellow in Law, 2001-2002
Prof. of Law, University of Notre Dame Law School, 2002-2017
Visiting Prof. of Law, University of Virgina Law School, 2007

Scholarship:
Congressional Insiders and Outsiders, U.Chi. L. Rev. (forthcoming 2017).
Originalism and Stare Decisis, 92 Notre Dame L. Rev. 1921 (2017).
Congressional Originalism, 19 U. Penn. J. of Const. L. 1 (2017) (with John Copeland Nagle)
Countering the Majoritarian Difficulty, 31 Const. Comm. 61 (2017).
Statutory Interpretation in The Encyclopedia of American Governance (2016).
Federal Court Jurisdiction in The Encyclopedia of American Governance (2016).
Substantive Canons and Faithful Agency, 90 B.U. L. REV. 109 (2010).
Federal Jurisdiction in Encyclopedia of the Supreme Court of the United States.
Introduction: Stare Decisis and Nonjudicial Actors, 83 Notre Dame Law Review 1147 (2008).
Procedural Common Law, 94 Virginia L. Rev. 813-88 (2008).
The Supervisory Power of the Supreme Court, 103 Colum. L. Rev. 324 (2006).
Statutory Stare Decisis in the Courts of Appeals, 73 Geo. Wash. L. Rev. 317 (2005).
Stare Decisis and Due Process, 74 U. Colo. L. Rev. 1011 (2003).
Catholic Judges in Capital Cases, 81 Marquette L.Rev. 303 (1998) (with John H. Garvey) 
Judicial Opinions: In the short time Judge Barrett has been on the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, she has authored eight majority opinions and one dissent. None of these had to do with issues surrounding either the First or Second Amendments. 
Opposition:Judge Barrett, a practicing Roman Catholic and mother of seven, is loved by evangelicals and hated by the Left. The former hopes she'll vote to overturn Roe v. Wade and the latter expect her to do that and thus find her objectionable. According to the left-wing Alliance for Justice, she decried Roe due to the Supreme Court "creat[ed] through judicial fiat a framework of abortion on demand.” "

Keith R. Blackwell

Personal:
42 y.o, (July 4, 1975) married to Angela Blackwell, three daughters. 
Current Position:Associate Justice, Georgia Supreme Court, appointed by Gov. Nathan Deal, 2012. 
Education:
University of Georgia, AB Summa Cum Laude, First Honor Graduate (4.0 GPA), 1996
University of Georgia School of Law, JD Summa Cum Laude, 1999 
Clerkships:
Judge J. L. Edmondson, 11th Circuit Court of Appeals, 1999-2000 
Previous Positions:Associate, Austin and Bird, Atlanta, GA, 2000-2003
Asst DA, Cobb County, GA, 2003-2005
Associate and Partner, Parker, Hudson, Rainer & Dobbs LLP, Atlanta, GA, 2005-2010 (commercial litigation)
Deputy Special Attorney General, Georgia, for constitutional litigation.
Judge, Georgia Court of Appeals, 2010-2012, appointed by Gov. Sonny Perdue

Judicial Opinions:
Concurring Opinion, Hertz v Bennett. The case involved the denial of a carry permit for James Hertz. He had pleaded no contest to five felony charges in 1994 in the state of Florida involving aggravated assault. He received three years probation and six months house arrest which he successfully completed. Under Georgia law, Hertz was not eligible for a carry permit due to his no contest plea on a felony. Blackwell concurred on the result but said:
"no one should misunderstand the Court to suggest that constitutional guarantees extend only as far as the home."
"To the contrary, the Court today applies intermediate scrutiny to [Official Code of Georgia] § 16-11-129, and in so doing, it acknowledges that the constitutional guarantees secure a right to carry firearms in public places, even if that right might be more limited than the right to keep firearms in the home." 
"Second, our decision today is a limited one," says the concurrence, which is joined by Presiding Justice P. Harris Hines and Justice David Nahmias. "[A]lthough the court did not enter a formal adjudication of guilt, it found a factual basis for the plea….In these peculiar circumstances, the Court concludes that the State of Georgia may – consistent with the constitutional guarantees of the right to keep and bear arms – deny Hertz a license to carry firearms in a public place."
Public Comments:
In 2013, in a talk given to students at North Cobb High School, Justice Blackwell had this to say about the Second Amendment:
Blackwell only chimed in briefly to request that the students look into the history of the Second Amendment and why the founding fathers believed it was needed. 
“It was all about limiting the power of government,” he said. “The idea was that there is only so much the government could do if the people are armed. That was fundamentally the idea. 
“I know some folks like to say, well that’s when people had muskets, now we’re talking about modern militaries and people can’t resist those with ordinary firearms.” 
He explained that isn’t the case if the students look at the wars in Vietnam, Iraq and Afghanistan where “ordinary folks” without sophisticated training “gave an awful lot of trouble to our men and women in uniform, who are the best trained and best equipped fighting force in the history of the world.”

Charles T. Canady
Personal:
64 y.o., is married to Jennifer Houghton Canady, has two teenage daughters. Presbyterian. 
Current Position: Chief Justice, Florida Supreme Court, appointed 2008 by Gov. Charles Crist 
Education:
Haverford College, BA, 1976
Yale University Law School, JD, 1979 
Previous Positions:
Private Practice, Holland and Knight, Lakeland, FL, 1979-1982
Private Practice, Lane, Trohn, Lakeland, FL, 1983-1992
Florida House of Representatives, 1984-1990
US House of Representatives, 1993-2001, Chairman of House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution,
General Counsel, Gov. Jeb Bush, 2001-2002
Judge, Florida 2nd Circuit Court of Appeal, 2002-2008

Judicial Opinions:
Dissenting Opinion, Bretherick v. State. Case involved who should be required to have the burden of proof in pre-trial evidentiary hearings involving Florida's Stand Your Ground law. In a 5-2 decision, the Florida Supreme Court held that the burden of proof was on the defendant. Canady in his dissenting opinion said: 
By imposing the burden of proof on the defendant at the pretrial evidentiary hearing, the majority substantially curtails the benefit of the immunity from trial conferred by the Legislature under the Stand Your Ground law. There is no reason to believe that the Legislature intended for a defendant to be denied immunity and subjected to trial when that defendant would be entitled to acquittal at trial on the basis of a Stand Your Ground defense. But the majority’s decision here guarantees that certain defendants who would be entitled to acquittal at trial will nonetheless be deprived of immunity from trial.
2A Votes:
While in the US House of Representatives, Canady voted against the Brady Bill and the Clinton Administration's Assault Weapons Ban. 

Steven M. Colloton
Personal:
55 y.o., is married to Deborah Colloton, has two daughters. Roman Catholic.

Current Position:
Judge, 8th Circuit Court of Appeals, appointed by Pres. George W. Bush, confirmed on Sept 4, 2003

Education:
Princeton University, AB, 1985
Yale University Law School, JD, 1988

Clerkships:
Judge Laurence Silberman, US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, 1988-1989
Chief Justice William Rehnquist, Supreme Court of the United States, 1989-2000
Previous Positions:
Special assistant to the assistant attorney general, Office of Legal Counsel, U.S. Department of Justice, 1990-1991
Assistant U.S. attorney, Northern District of Iowa, 1991-1999
Associate independent counsel, Whitewater investigation, 1995-1996
Private practice, Iowa, 1999-2001
Adjunct lecturer, University of Iowa College of Law, 2000
U.S. attorney for the Southern District of Iowa, 2001-2003

Judicial Opinions:
As of January 2017, Judge Colloton had authored over 615 majority opinions and numerous concurrences and dissents in his years on the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals. He has four decisions relating directly to the Second Amendment in which he rejected the claims each time. The SCOTUSBlog summarizes them:
We found four pertinent Second Amendment cases. Colloton rejected a Second Amendment challenge to gun laws each time – personally writing an opinion in three of those cases. These are Rodgers v. Knight (rejecting claim that the seizure and retention of a citizen’s firearms by police had violated citizen’s Second Amendment rights); United States v. Bena (rejecting constitutional challenge to federal statute punishing possession of firearms while subject to a court order of protection); and United States v. Lippman (concurring in the judgment and arguing that assuming the Second Amendment confers an individual right to bear arms, the federal prohibition on possession of a firearm by a person subject to a domestic-violence restraining order is constitutional). In United States v. Humphrey Colloton joined, without writing separately, a panel opinion upholding the constitutionality of federal felon-in-possession gun felony statute.

Allison H. Eid

Personal:
53 y.o, married to Troy Eid, former US Attorney for the District of Colorado, and has a son and daughter.

Current Position:
Judge, 10th Circuit Court of Appeals, appointed by Pres. Donald Trump to replace Justice Neil Gorsuch in 2017. Confirmed on Nov. 2, 2017.
Education:Stanford University, A.B., 1987
University of Chicago Law School, J.D., 1991

Clerkships:
Judge Jerry E. Smith, U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, 1991-1992
Justice Clarence Thomas, Supreme Court of the United States, 1993-1994

Previous Positions:Special Assistant and Speechwriter to Sec. of Education William Bennett, 1987-1988
Associate - commercial and appellate litigation, Arnold and Porter, Washington, DC 1994-1998
Assoc. Prof., University of Colorado School of Law, 1998-2009, 2011-2015 Solicitor General of Colorado, 2005 Associate Justice, Colorado Supreme Court, 2006-2017. Appointed by Gov. Bill Owens and retained by voters in 2008.

Scholarship:
Private Party Immunities to Section 1983 Suits, 57 U. Chi. L. Rev. 1323 (1990)
The Tort Reform Debate: The View from Colorado, 31 Seton Hall L. Rev. 740 (2000-2001)
A Spotlight on Structure, 72 U. Colo. L. Rev. 911 (2001)
Epsteinian Torts: Richard A. Epstein, Cases and Materials on Torts, 25 Seattle U. L. Rev. 89 (2001-2002)
Federalism and Formalism, 11 Wm. & Mary Bill Rts. J. 1191 (2002-2003)
Tort Reform and Federalism - The Supreme Court Talks, Bush Listens, 29 Hum. Rts. 10 (2002)
Justice White's Federalism: The (Sometimes) Conflicting Forces of Nationalism, Pragmatism and Judicial Restraint, 74 U. Colo. L. Rev. 1629 (2003)
The Property Clause and New Federalism, 75 U. Colo. L. Rev. 1241 (2004)
Teaching New Federalism, 49 St. Louis U. L.J. 875 (2004-2005)
Preemption and the Federalism Five, 37 Rutgers L.J. 1 (2005-2006)

Judicial Opinions:
Of particular note to my readers would be Eid's opinion  in Board of Regents of the University of Colorado v. Students for Concealed Carry on Campus from 2012. The case was brought to the Colorado Supreme Court by attorney Jim Manley and the Mountain States Legal Foundation as a challenge to the University of Colorado's assertion that Colorado's Concealed Carry Act exempted the university. The Colorado Supreme Court found unanimously for the students. 
From her opinion:

The court of appeals held that the Students stated a claim for relief because the CCA expressly applies to “all areas of the state.” The court further concluded that the Students had stated a claim for relief under article II, section 13 of the Colorado Constitution, which affords individuals the right to bear arms in self-defense. See Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, LLC v. Regents of the U. of Colo., No. 09CA1230, --- P.3d ---, 2010 WL 1492308, at *7, *11 (Colo. App. April 15, 2010). 
We granted certiorari and now affirm. We hold that the CCA’s comprehensive statewide purpose, broad language, and narrow exclusions show that the General Assembly intended to divest the Board of Regents of its authority to regulate concealed handgun possession on campus. Accordingly, we agree with the court of appeals that, by alleging the Policy violates the CCA, the Students have stated a claim for relief. Because we affirm on statutory grounds, we do not consider the Students’ constitutional claim.

Opposition:

The Alliance for Justice calls Eid a "narrow minded elitist" which is laughable. Eid was a young child when her father abandoned the family leaving them with nothing and her mother was suddenly forced into the workforce to support Eid and her sibling. Some of Eid's biggest backers for the 10th Circuit judgeship were Indian tribes as well as the National Native American Bar Association who said she understood those in "Indian Country". Neither the support from the tribes nor her childhood indicate anything near what would be expected of a "narrow minded elitist". She was also opposed by The Leadership Conference and the League of Conservation Voters. Meh!

Shocking! A Semi-Honest Email From A Gun Control Group


I received an email yesterday from Peter Ambler who is the executive director of that cult of personality known as Giffords. His email said they inundated you with emails on a regular basis in the hopes you'd kick in a few bucks. I was shocked by this honest admission.

John -

We send a lot of emails. No doubt about it. You probably get as many messages from us as you do from members of your family. There’s a reason for that.

Can we explain?

The truth is, the overwhelming majority of the donations we receive come from lots and lots and lots of people giving small amounts of money. People of all backgrounds and in all communities chipping in 5, 10, 20 bucks because we all share one goal: changing our gun laws and saving lives.

And most of those donations? They come in response to emails like this one. So now you can see why they are so important… and why we have to ask:

Can you chip in $3 to Giffords PAC as part of our emergency 72-hour fundraising drive? It ends tomorrow at midnight. So this is important.

Gabby, Mark, and everyone at Giffords are extraordinarily proud of the way we raise our money here. Not just because it keeps us in the fight against the gun lobby, but because so many people stepping up to take ownership of our country’s future on this issue is how we create change.

All my best,

Peter Ambler Executive Director, Giffords

I can't say this email is completely honest because I know they've received many five and six figure donations. In their latest report with the Federal Elections Commission they reported large donations from people like Jon Shirley ($30,000), former president of Microsoft, and Marcy Carsey ($25,000), the Hollywood producer. Going back even further you find donations from Michael Bloomberg ($250,000) and Connie Ballmer ($250,000), wife of former Microsoft CEO and LA Clippers owner. I will give Ambler this that the trend is now towards unitemized donations aka small ones as opposed to large donations that the FEC requires to be identified as to the donor and amount.

Wednesday, June 27, 2018

932 Pages Is Hard To Ignore


Alinsky's Rule No. 4 states "Make the enemy live up to its own book of rules." Part of the rule book for administrative rulemaking is that each and every comment must be examined. It is easy to skim over repetitive comments stating "teh bump stock is bad" or, conversely, "you are wrong, you child-killing gun grabbers." It is much harder to ignore a 923 legal document with 35 exhibits written by firearms law attorneys.

That is what the Firearm Policy Coalition and the Firearms Policy Foundation dumped into the laps of the bureaucrats at DOJ and BATFE. The bureaucrats at DOJ thought their 50 pages of legal sophistry as to why bump fire stocks are illegal would scare people away. It didn't. The FPC/FPF comment was written by attorneys Joshua Prince and Adam Kraut of the Firearms Industry Consulting Group. They know a thing or two about the NFA and firearms law in general.

The key thing about such a long document such as the comment submitted by FPC/FPF is that each and every point will have to be considered and the rule will have to address them. Moreover, it sets up the playing field for the anticipated court challenge to the probably bump stock ban rule. Only things that were brought up during the comment period can be considered by the courts. No new objections can be made.

Below is the news release from the Firearms Policy Coalition and the Firearms Policy Foundation detailing their 923 page comment. As a reminder, doing stuff like this isn't cheap and proponents of gun rights don't have our own pet billionaire to fund us unlike the corporate gun ban lobby. You might want to send a few bucks to the FPF- tax deductible, you know - to help in the effort.

WASHINGTON, DC (June 27, 2018) — Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and Firearms Policy Foundation (FPF) have announced that their extensive, 923-page opposition comment was filed with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) regarding the agency’s proposed rulemaking to ban “bump-stock” devices. The FPC Comment and its 35 exhibits can be viewed online in their entirety at https://www.firearmspolicy.org/fpc-fpf-opposition-atf-bump-stock-ban.
The FPC Comment in opposition was filed on the groups’ behalf by attorneys Joshua Prince and Adam Kraut of Firearms Industry Consulting Group (FICG) after President Trump directed Attorney General Jeff Sessions to use executive actions to unlawfully and unconstitutionally expand the scope of statutes to force the dispossession and destruction of legally-acquired property--without just compensation--and subject possibly more than 500,000 Americans to severe federal criminal penalties. FICG attorney Adam Kraut produced a video (Exhibit 28) with Patton Media and Consulting to show how a bump-fire-type device actually works when it is installed on a firearm.
“It is beyond outrageous that ATF has purposely misled the public on the function of bump-stock-devices,” said FICG Chief Counsel Joshua Prince. “Even setting aside the constitutional concerns, there are a plethora of issues that preclude ATF from moving forward with its bump-stock proposal. ATF is unlawfully attempting to usurp the Congress’ power by modifying a definition codified in the tax code by Congress and is attempting to retroactively apply this definition, which is precluded by federal tax laws designed to prevent this kind of action by the Government.”
“Perhaps more frightening than the text of this unlawful executive action is the fact that the Trump Administration is expressly saying that not only can the ATF re-write Congress’ statutes to mean whatever they prefer, but that the Second Amendment doesn’t protect conduct with common semi-automatic firearms and parts, let alone devices like machineguns,” commented FPC President and FPF Chairman Brandon Combs. “That should send chills down the spines of American gun owners.”
“Our important opposition is not only a substantial addition to the rulemaking record, but a warning shot across the ATF’s bow. If the ATF proceeds with this unlawful and unconstitutional proposal, our attorneys have been instructed to explore every possible legal remedy, including filing a federal lawsuit and seeking an injunction. We would relish the opportunity to defend the Constitution and law-abiding American people against the Trump Administration’s patently anti-gun arguments in a court of law,” Combs concluded.
BACKGROUND
In ten letter rulings between 2008 and 2017, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) concluded that bump-stocks and some similar devices did not qualify as “machineguns” because they did not “automatically” shoot more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger.
On October 1, 2017, a terrorist used firearms in a premeditated attack on attendees of an outdoor concert in Las Vegas, Nevada, killing 58 people and injuring more.
On December 26, 2017, ATF published an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) in the Federal Register regarding the “Application of the Definition of Machinegun to ‘Bump Fire’ Stocks and Other Similar Devices” as an initial step in the process of substantively changing through fiat regulation the statutory definition of “machinegun” with the intent to ban bump-stock-type devices they previously ruled were legal to acquire, possess, and use.
On January 25, 2018, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) submitted comments responding to the ATF – an agency under the Department of Justice – Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) in opposition to the “Application of the Definition of Machinegun to “Bump Fire” Stocks and Other Similar Devices.”
On February 20, 2018, President Donald Trump issued a memorandum to Attorney General Sessions directing the Department of Justice to initiate a regulatory action to ban “bump fire” stocks and similar devices. (83 Fed. Reg. 7949.)
On March 29, 2018, the ATF published its Notice of Proposed Rulemaking regarding a proposed ban on “Bump-Stock-Type Devices” in the Federal Register. (83 Fed. Reg. 13442.)
On June 19, 2018, attorneys at Firearms Industry Consulting Group submitted over 900 pages of analysis and documents, along with multiple video exhibits, on behalf of FPC and FPF (the “FPC Opposition”) in opposition to the ATF’s proposed rulemaking. In the FPC Opposition, and by separate letter to ATF Acting Director Thomas E. Brandon, FIGG (on behalf of FPC and FPF) demanded a hearing before any final rulemaking action pursuant to the right codified under 18 U.S.C. § 926(b).
The comment period for ATF rulemaking docket no. 2017R-22 will close on June 27, 2018, at midnight Eastern Daylight Time.
SUMMARY OF OPPOSITION ARGUMENTS
  • ATF’s Proposed Rulemaking (docket no. 2017R-22) is procedurally flawed and violates the Administrative Procedure Act (APA)
  • ATF’s proposed rule violates the Constitution in numerous ways, including:
    • I – Separation of Powers
    • I – Ex Post Facto Clause
    • Fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms protected under the Second Amendment
    • Rights to due process, fair notice, and just compensation for the taking of property protected under the Fifth Amendment
  • ATF’s proposed rule exceeds its statutory authority
  • ATF’s proposed rule is arbitrary and capricious
  • ATF’s proposed rule is unconstitutionally vague
  • ATF failed to consider viable and precedential alternatives
  • ATF’s proposed rule is not supported by policy considerations
  • ATF’s proposed rule “should be withdrawn and summarily discarded, or, in the alternative, ATF should elect Alternative 1 and abandon the proposed rulemaking in its entirety.”
RELATED NEWS RELEASES
Oct. 6, 2017: Firearms Policy Coalition Repudiates Proposed Bans on Semi-Automatic Firearms and Accessories, Including “Bump Fire” Stocks - http://bit.ly/fpc-2017-10-6-bumpstocks
Jan. 25, 2018: FPC Says ATF ‘Bump Stock’ Regulation Proposal is “Illegal” - http://bit.ly/fpc-2018-1-25-bumpstock-ban-illegal
Feb. 20, 2018: FPC Calls President Trump’s ‘Bump Stock’ Ban “Lawless” - http://bit.ly/fpc-2018-2-20-trump-ban-lawless
Feb. 26, 2018: President Trump Says He Will ‘Write Out’ Bump Stocks Without Congress; Two Second Amendment Groups Initiate Legal Action to Oppose Ban - http://bit.ly/fpc-2018-2-26-trump-bumpstocks
LIST OF DOCUMENTS AND EXHIBITS FILED
All documents and videos listed below are available online at https://www.firearmspolicy.org/fpc-fpf-opposition-atf-bump-stock-ban.
FPC and FPF's Comments in Opposition to Proposed Rule ATF 2017R-22
Exhibit 1 - FICG Expedited FOIA request dated March 30, 2018
Exhibit 2 - LVMPD Preliminary Investigative Report, January 18, 2018
Exhibit 3 - Video: Iraqveteran8888, Worlds Fastest Shooter vs Bump Fire! – Guns Reviews, YouTube, October 13, 2014
Exhibit 4 - Video: Miculek.com, AR-15 5 shots in 1 second with fastest shooter ever, Jerry Miculek (Shoot Fast!), YouTube, June 20, 2013
Exhibit 5 - Carl Bussjaeger, [Update] Bumbling Machinations on Bump Stocks?, April 2, 2018 and [Updated] Bump-fire Rule: “Comments Not Accepted”, March 30, 2018
Exhibit 6 - Motion in Limine, United States v. Friesen, CR-08-041-L (W.D. Okla. Mar. 19, 2009)
Exhibit 7 - John Bresnahan and Seung Min Kim, Attorney General Eric Holder held in contempt of Congress, June 28, 2012
Exhibit 8 - Testimony of Gary Schaible, United States v. Rodman, et al., CR-10-01047-PHX-ROS
Exhibit 9 - Senator Diane Feinstein, Feinstein: Congress Shouldn’t Pass the Buck on Bump-Fire Stocks, October 11, 2017
Exhibit 10 - ATF Determinations
Exhibit 11 - Video: Shooting Videos, Rapid manual trigger manipulation (Rubber Band Assisted), YouTube, December 14, 2006
Exhibit 12 - Video: StiThis1, AK-47 75 round drum Bumpfire!!!, YouTube, September 5, 2011
Exhibit 13 - Video: ThatGunGuy45, ‘Bump Fire’ without a bump-fire stock, courtesy of ThatGunGuy45, YouTube, October 13, 2017
Exhibit 14 - Video: M45, How to bumpfire without bumpfire stock, YouTube, October 8, 2017
Exhibit 15 - Verified Declaration of Damien Guedes
Exhibit 16 - Verified Declaration of Matthew Thompson
Exhibit 17 - Video: Vice News, Meet One Of The Analysts Who Determined That Bump Stocks Were Legal, YouTube, October 11, 2017
Exhibit 18- Video: Fastest Shooter OF ALL TIME! Jerry Miculek | Incredible Shooting Montage, DailyMotion, 2014
Exhibit 19- Gun Control Act of 1968, 82 Stat. 1235
Exhibit 20 - 26 C.F.R. § 179.120
Exhibit 21 - Joshua Prince, Violating Due Process: Convictions Based on the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record When its ‘Files are Missing’, September 28, 2008
Exhibit 22 - Eric Larson’s testimony and exhibits of April 3, 1998, before the House Committee on Appropriations
Exhibit 23 - ATF Quarterly Roll Call Lesson Plan, July 12, 2012
Exhibit 24 - Eric M. Larson, How Firearms Registration Abuse & the “Essential Operational Mechanism” of Guns May Adversely Affect Gun Collectors, Gun Journal, March 1998
Exhibit 25 - U.S. Government’s Brief in Support of Cross Motion For Summary Judgment And In Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion For Summary Judgment, Freedom Ordinance Mfg. Inc., v. Thomas E. Brandon, Case No. 3:16-cv-243-RLY-MPB
Exhibit 26 - Video: Molon Labe, hogan 7 m16.wmv, YouTube, October 25, 2011
Exhibit 27 - Testimony of ATF Senior Analyst Richard Vasquez in U.S. v. One Historic Arms Model54RCCS, No. 1:09-CV-00192-GET
Exhibit 28 - Video: Adam Kraut Esq. and Patton Media and Consulting, Bump Stock Analytical Video, June 14, 2018
Exhibit 29 - National Firearms Act: Hearings Before the Committee on Ways and Means, H.R. Rep. No. 9066, 73rd Cong. 2nd Sess. April 16, 18, and May 14, 15, and 16 1934
Exhibit 30 - Testimony of Police Chief J. Thomas Manger
Exhibit 31 - ProPublica, Workers’ Comp Benefits: How Much is a Limb Worth?, March 5, 2015
Exhibit 32 - Verified Declaration of former ATF Acting Chief of FTB Rick Vasquez
Exhibit 33 - Verified Declaration of Jonathan Patton of Patton Media and Consulting
Exhibit 34 - FICG’s Letter on Behalf of FPC to Acting Director Brandon
Exhibit 35 - FPC’s January 25, 2018 Letter in Opposition to ATF’s ANPRM re: “Application of the Definition of Machinegun to ‘Bump Fire’ Stocks and Other Similar Devices”

Tuesday, June 26, 2018

Wednesday Is The Last Day To Comment On ATF's Proposed Retroactive Ban On Bump Stocks


Tomorrow, Wednesday, June 28th at 11:59pm EDT, is the close of the comment period on the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives proposed ban on bump fire stocks. According to the legal sophistry of the DOJ lawyers, the BATFE erred when it said bump fire stocks did not violate the National Firearms Act. Thus, if the rule is adopted, bump fire stocks will be treated as machine guns and since they were produced after the Hughes Amendment was enacted they will be destroyed without compensation.

Bump fire stocks are a novelty to me. However, more important is how this ruling could be used to expand restrictions on all semi-automatic firearms, trigger upgrades, and the list goes on. To paraphrase Pastor Martin Niemoller's quote about the Nazis, "first they came for the bump fire stocks and I did not speak out because I didn't own a bump fire stock..."

The corporate gun ban lobby has been active in the last few days trying to solicit their members to submit comments. I'm sure they'll get a lot that will ignore the law and play on emotion. While I'll have another post up in the morning about the Firearms Policy Coalition's 900+ page submission, for the time being here is a reminder from Grass Roots North Carolina.

STOP THE ‘BUMP-STOCK’ GUN BAN

The Dangerous Precedent of the ‘Bump-Stock’  ban.

The law that a ‘machine gun’ is defined by one trigger pull firing multiple rounds was written by congress and signed off on by the executive branch.  But with ‘Writing It Out’ the executive branch all by its lonesome is going to magically redefine multiple trigger pulls as one so that they can call a bump-stock equipped semi-auto firearm a ‘machine gun’.  

Specifically, these devices convert an otherwise semiautomatic firearm into a machinegun by functioning as a self-acting or self-regulating mechanism that harnesses the recoil energy of the semiautomatic firearm in a manner that allows the trigger to reset and continue firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter.

The trigger still has to be pulled for every shot, but with the word play magic, those additional trigger pulls are going to be ‘written out’ so with supposedly one trigger pull, you have a ‘Machine gun’!

It’s a semi-automatic miracle!      

If the required trigger pull for every shot has been ‘written out’ devices such as Bump-stocks, belt loops, rubber bands or fingers will have to be banned since these can also turn that which is ‘semi-automatic’ into something that is ‘automatic’. 
But they can’t very well ban pants, rubber bands or fingers, so they will have to ban semi-automatic firearms instead.
   
But wait!  There’s more!
   
With this magical word play any gun that can fire again with just a trigger pull could also be banned as a 'machine gun', meaning revolvers or shotguns could also be eliminated.

See how easy it is to ban just about everything by just changing the meaning of a few words?
Nancy Pelosi [Bless her heart] openly admitted that she hoped the ‘Bump-Stock’ ban would lead to a slippery slope towards other restrictions on our freedom.  
The Left wants to cynically exploit the recent shootings for political gain, This is only round one of a coming battle to defend your Constitutional rights.

IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED!

  • The end of the comment period is tomorrow: June 27, 2018  so you only have a short time to express your opinion on this important and far reaching issue.
  • Help GRNC reload for the coming battleThe Left cannot stand it when you exercise your rights and they will stop at nothing to deprive you of them. 
  •  We desperately need money and volunteers for the upcoming battle. Please help by donating at: https://www.grnc.org/join-grnc/contribute

 

DELIVER THIS MESSAGE

This is in opposition to the 'bump device' ban, or any such rule.
  
 The Executive branch of the Federal government cannot simply change the meaning of words to ‘write out’ things that are unpopular at the moment.

It also cannot turn semi-automatic firearms into ‘machine guns’ with the stroke of a pen.  These firearms require multiple trigger pulls to fire.  No amount of word magic can change that fact.

Attempting to do so will set a dangerous precedent with potential to put all guns on the chopping block.  That will most certainly INFRINGE on the 2nd amendment. 

The Federal government has no authority to  change the meaning of words that impact the law in this matter.
 
Respectfully,