by Watch the latest video at <a href=”http://video.foxnews.com”>video.foxnews.com</a>
NRA-ILA Statement On Court’s Decision On Attorneys’ Fees
Chris Cox, head of the NRA-ILA, released this statement this afternoon regarding the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals decision regarding the awarding of attorneys’ fees in NRA et al v. City of Chicago et al and McDonald et al v. Chicago et al.
Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals Holds NRA Entitled to Attorneys’ Fees in Lawsuits Against Chicago and Oak Park, Illinois
Thursday, June 02, 2011
Fairfax, VA—Today, the U.S. Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals conclusively and forcefully held, without need for oral argument, that the National Rifle Association has the right to recover attorneys’ fees in its lawsuits against the city of Chicago’s and the village of Oak Park’s unconstitutional gun bans. The court held that the NRA was a prevailing party in the case of National Rifle Association v. City of Chicago and Village of Oak Park.
“This is a Second Amendment victory and a civil rights victory. The National Rifle Association and the Second Amendment prevailed against those who sought to deny the right to keep and bear arms in Chicago and Oak Park,” said Chris W. Cox, executive director of NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action. “The attempt to avoid paying the NRA’s attorneys’ fees was rightly found to be unjust by the Court.”
After the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right to keep and bear arms for all Americans in the historic McDonald v. Chicago and NRA v. Chicago and Oak Park cases, it remanded them for the purpose of issuing an injunction against Chicago and Oak Park’s unconstitutional gun ordinances. Before that injunction was issued, however, those ordinances were repealed. The City and the Village then argued that the NRA was not a prevailing party and should not be allowed to recover attorneys’ fees. The District Court, which originally ruled against the NRA, agreed and denied the fee award.
Today’s Seventh Circuit decision overturns that ruling, holding instead that the NRA is indeed a prevailing party and is entitled to receive reimbursement for attorneys’ fees. The amount to be recovered will be established by the District Court.
“This is a major victory for the NRA. While we are grateful to recover our attorneys’ fees, however, we remain steadfast in our belief that Chicago and Oak Park continue to circumvent the law of the land and deny their law-abiding residents the Second Amendment freedoms protected by the Constitution. We will continue to fight those efforts until the Second Amendment is fully respected,” concluded Cox.
I see Mr. Cox still has a problem saying the name of the attorney who won the case actually heard in the Supreme Court as well as the Heller case. Let me say it for him – AH-lin Grrr-AH.
Heh! Chicago Has To Pay Up.
After the City of Chicago lost McDonald et al v. City of Chicago et al in the Supreme Court, they changed their gun ban ordinances. Because of this, they argued that the plaintiffs were not “prevailing parties” and thus weren’t entitled to attorneys’ fees. U.S. District Court Judge Milton Shadur agreed with them and denied Alan Gura and the attorneys for the National Rifle Association the attorneys’ fees that should have been due them.
Today, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals issued a decision overturning Judge Shadur and ordering “reasonable attorneys’ fees under §1988.” This decision applied both to the McDonald case and the cases brought by the NRA against the City of Chicago and the Village of Oak Park, Illinois.
The Court of Appeals noted that Judge Shadur was correct in that the plaintiffs didn’t receive a favorable judgment from the District Court. However, they continued:
But they did better: They won in the Supreme Court, which entered a judgment in their favor. When the Supreme Court rendered its decision, the controversy was live.
The Court goes on to add noting that Chicago and Oak Park changed their ordinances in response to the Supreme Court’s McDonald decision:
Many a defendant gives up after a district court’s final decision and does not appeal; some other parties settle to avoid the risk of reversal. If a cessation of hostilities after a district court’s decision does not deprive the victor of prevailing party status, why should conceding defeat after a decision by the Supreme Court do so?
The attorneys for Chicago and Oak Park argued that the decision in McDonald only addressed a “preliminary legal issue” and didn’t resolve the plaintiff’s claims against the municipalities. Chief Judge Frank Easterbrook writing for the Court of Appeals didn’t think much of that argument.
After the Supreme Court held that the second amendment applies to the municipalities’ ordinances, defendants’ position was untenable; neither Chicago nor Oak Park contends that the ordinance in force in 2008 could have been sustained under Heller’s substantive standards. This litigation was over except for the entry of an injunction by the district court. Chicago and Oak Park capitulated, which made the exercise unnecessary. By the time defendants bowed to the inevitable, plaintiffs had in hand a judgment of the Supreme Court that gave them everything they needed. If a favorable decision of the Supreme Court does not count as “the necessary judicial imprimatur” on the plaintiffs’ position (Buckhannon, 532 U.S. at 605), what would?
According to his Twitter feed, Alan Gura just happened to be in Chicago today. He notes it is a beautiful day. Indeed it is and it is good to see that the City of Chicago is going to have to shell out the big bucks for their obstinacy as well they should.
Quote Of The Day
From the amicus brief submitted to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in Peruta v. County of San Diego by the Second Amendment Foundation and the CalGuns Foundation.
An official’s personal views of someone’s suitability to enjoy constitutional rights, or of an individual’s moral virtue, simply cannot be factors in regulating the exercise of constitutional rights.
This was written by Alan Gura in response to the requirements of California Penal Code Section 12050 which states that an applicant for a concealed carry permit must show “good cause” and be of “good moral character”.
Sounds Like A Suppressed Kriss
I just saw this video on Everyday No Days Off and it reminded me of stuff from this past weekend’s LuckyGunner Blogger Shoot.
I swear the suppressed Kriss Vector sounded darned close to some of these cameras. Heck, that first camera sounded just like what I heard when I fired the Thompson M1 while wearing hearing protection. That metallic rattle is virtually identical. Just close y our eyes and listen.
NW Multigun Challenge Will Use Crimson Trace Lights And IR Lasers In Competition
This sounds interesting – a 3-gun competition using a dark house and night vision goggles along with Crimson Trace IR lasers.
Crimson Trace continues its support of the competitive shooting sports this summer, donating prizes, guns and ammo to several prestigious events as part of its drive to promote personal security with the advent of the lightweight, slim, Lightguard™ platform. Latest in the long line of matches is the NW Multigun Challenge, July 9&10 in Albany, OR where the company will be building a dark shoot house. Competitors will test their skills, engaging multiple targets using both white light from the company’s innovative Lightguard™ handgun-mounted lights, as well as carbine-mounted IR lasers in conjunction with night vision equipment.
“This is a unique opportunity to shoot in both low light and no light scenarios and to my knowledge, no one has ever attempted it at a major 3 gun match.” Said Kent Thomas, Director of Marketing for Crimson Trace. “The new Lightguard was developed specifically for target engagement in across-the-room situations and our MVF-600 IR laser is currently in the hands of US Special Forces troops, so shooters will have the best tools available in the match.”
Crimson Trace has a 15 year history of serving its customers with the best of US-made defensive tools, first with the award-winning Lasergrip™ instinctively activated laser sight and now with the Lightguard 100 lumen white light for Glock, S&W and Springfield handguns.
The picture below shows the Lightguard for the S&W M&P, the Glock, and the XD.
HB 650 Passes Committee Vote In NC General Assembly
HB 650 – the omnibus bill that amends a number of North Carolina’s firearms laws – passed out of the House Judiciary C Subcommittee today. Grass Roots North Carolina issued this on the passage.
HB 650, the massive gun bill we have been telling you about is now passed in House Judiciary C Sub-Committee. We now need you to contact the full House list to express your support for this important bill.
To recap:
HB 650 is a huge and aggressive bill, meaning it will be difficult to pass. But if passed, it will go far toward reversing the creeping encroachment on gun owners’ rights perpetuated in previous sessions of the legislature, including (but not limited to):
- Castle Doctrine (yet another vehicle for popular Castle Doctrine is now moving);
- Reducing penalties for carrying firearms on “educational property,” including a protection against accidentally becoming a criminal by requiring that offenders “knowingly” brought the gun onto educational property;
- Enabling concealed carry at events for which admission is charged;
- Reducing penalties for a host of minor (often inadvertent) gun violations;
- Adding protections for gun owners whose guns are confiscated pursuant to domestic protective orders;
- Improves concealed handgun reciprocity to straight recognition of out-of-state permits;
- Removes provisions for concealed handgun applicants under which sheriffs are conducting intrusive investigations of medical history; and
- Enabling employees to keep guns in locked vehicles at places of employment.
Checking the legislative calendar for the rest of the week, this bill has not been put on the calendar for the 2nd and 3rd reading. Unless it passes out of the State House by June 9th, it can’t be considered for passage in the 2012 session of the General Assembly.
Coalition Of Mexican And American Groups Seek To Ban “Assault Weapons”
Dave Kopel is interviewed by Cam Edwards on the efforts of Mexican and U.S. groups to have semi-automatic firearms banned in the U.S. According to the Latin American Herald Tribune, they are organizing a petition which they plan to present to President Obama.
One of these groups is Global Exchange. This is a pro-Castro, pro-Hugo Chavez group which sent monies to the families of insurgents in Fallujah, Iraq.
More Whistle-Blowing Over Project Gunwalker?
There was an interesting post yesterday on CleanUpATF talking about pending congressional hearings and whistle-blowing. The post was from “CovertOne” who appears to be a Special Agent in the field for ATF.
Word is that with the anticipation of Congressional hearings becoming a reality and ATF employees feeling some protection for the first time in their careers, the floodgates have opened.
This was my reply when I provided Congress with some information today:
Delivery has failed to these recipients or distribution lists:
Whistleblower (Judiciary-Rep) Whistleblower@judiciary-rep.senate.govThe recipient’s mailbox is full and can’t accept messages now. Microsoft Exchange will not try to redeliver this message for you. Please try resending this message later, or contact the recipient directly.
If “CovertOne” is correct, expect to see even more revelations about Project Gunwalker as more and more ATF employees seek cover from the fallout. I’m sure that what we’ve seen so far is only the tip of the iceberg.
UPDATE: Senator Grassley’s mailbox for whistle-blowers is now working correctly according to an email I received from David Codrea. My guess is that it filled up over the long holiday weekend.
Easy Way To Comment On ATF’s Power Grab
Thanks to reader P.T. we have our own form-letter generator to submit comments to the Office of Management and Budget on the ATF’s proposed multiple rifle sale reporting requirement for the Southwest border states. There is a pre-written letter in the generator which you can modify as you wish.
Please forward this to all your friends, family, and others you know who believe in preserving our gun rights and freedoms. This really is an “Army of Davids” approach to use the Instapundit’s term. Unlike the Brady Campaign and Mayor Bloomberg’s Illegal Mayors, this is a totally grassroots effort done in less than 24 hours. We didn’t need a grant from the Joyce Foundation to put this together!
UPDATE: I have taken down the letter generator as the comment period has now closed. I will check with P.T. to find out the final numbers of submissions.
I want to thank everyone who helped with this little project. First, to P.T. for setting up the account and writing the code. Without this, it couldn’t have been done. Second, to all the bloggers, forums, and organizations that posted a link or put the code up on their own site. Finally, and most importantly, to everyone who submitted comments. Taking the time to submit a comment is what citizen democracy is all about. This was a true grassroots effort for gun rights.
UPDATE II: The final numbers are in. P.T. reports that we had 3,203 submissions to the Office of Management and Budget. We will have to wait until the ATF releases the public comments to see how this number impacts the final count. That said, it had to help counteract the Brady Campaign’s letter generator.