The Question Presented in McDonald v. Chicago is:
“Whether the Second Amendment is incorporated into the Due Process Clause or the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment so as to be applicable to the States, thereby invalidating ordinances prohibiting possession of handguns in the home.”
This is HUGE!
Alan Gura for the Petitioner, as well as several of the leading Amici have all briefed about the Privileges or Immunities Clause. That the Justices framed the question to inquire about incorporation through the Due Process Clause or the Privileges or Immunities Clause is breathtaking (well to me at least).
Nascent followers of the blog will remember some of my more recent posts on P/I in the context of the 2nd Amendment and the future of the Constitution in 2020.
This question presented will make my work in progress, Opening Pandora’s Box. The Privileges or Immunities Clause and the Constitution in 2020, all the more relevant prior to this case being argued.
Update: I will be attending the Constitution in 2020 Conference in New Haven. If they don’t discuss P/I in light of the 2nd Amendment, I will be sure to ask. Stay tuned for my live blogs.
Update Again: I just saw the link from Instapundit! Thanks for the link!
Update Again (at 1:30 EST). I launched this blog less than 24 hours ago, and I have already received 1,200 hits from Instapundit. This is a real Instalanche! Please help spread the word about my fledgling blog; add me to your RSS Feed, follow me on Twitter, check me out on Facebook, and peruse my published articles on SSRN. Thanks!
Update Again (at 3:53 EST). Just hit 1600 hits! Please also see my new post discussing an ensuing debate over the Privileges or Immunities clause in the comment thread of the Volokh Conspiracy. This issue is just heating up. The oven at this blog has already been preheated. Thanks!
September 30, 2009 at 11:36 am
So…when do you get barred so you can finally start working on Amici? Or will your comparative advantage remain at the front end, writing the law review articles that get the ball rolling on such “breathtaking” developments at all?
September 30, 2009 at 11:39 am
[…] in the home (District of Columbia v. Heller).” Interestingly, they’re asking about Privileges And Immunities, […]
September 30, 2009 at 11:59 am
Sigh, Insty, thats the “Privileges or Immunities” the “Privileges And Immunities” is a different clause.
September 30, 2009 at 12:02 pm
[…] in addition to McDonald v. Chicago, some other cert grants of interest for today that interest me include (H/T to SCOTUSBlog): Carr v. […]
September 30, 2009 at 12:49 pm
[…] Josh Blackman I officially launched this blog last night. This morning I wrote a post about the Cert Grant in McDonald v. Chicago, and within minutes Instapundit link to my […]
September 30, 2009 at 12:59 pm
[…] Supreme Court is asking about the petitioner's (Gura's) argument. (It bodes well). More here=>Question Presented in 2nd Amendment Case Asks About Privileges or Immunities Clause! Josh Blackman&#… __________________ This thread needs more Milla […]
September 30, 2009 at 1:01 pm
No, no, no!
The Fourteenth is a completely different citizenship, bestowed by the Feds upon corporate entities within their Article 1 Section 7 clause 17, and Article 4 Section 3 clause 2 territories (extended to the states after the civil war). It is NOT the Citizenship that binds We the People of the original Constitution and its first ten Amendments.
Bringing the Fourteenth into a primary Constitutional discussion confuses the issue, and makes for terrible law.
September 30, 2009 at 1:10 pm
Could you explain in laymen’s terms? I know it’s hard, but pretty please?
September 30, 2009 at 2:31 pm
[…] over at SCOTUS Blog, Josh Blackman’s Blog, Volokh Conspriacy and Hot […]
September 30, 2009 at 3:50 pm
[…] The Debate over Privileges or Immunities and the 2nd Amendment Rages on Volokh Comments September 30, 2009 — Josh Blackman Over at the Volokh Conspiracy, a debate is raging over the Privileges or Immunities Clause and the 2nd Amendment Incorporation Case, McDonald v. Chicago. […]
September 30, 2009 at 8:22 pm
[…] Question Presented in 2nd Amendment Case Asks About Privileges or Immunities Clause! The Question Presented in McDonald v. Chicago is: “Whether the Second Amendment is incorporated into the Due […] […]
October 1, 2009 at 12:51 am
Nice post! Found my way here from Volokh’s blog.
I’m with you, sir: it is exciting that the Supreme Court has saw fit to address the “privileges or immunities” clause.
Of course, when I tried to explain this to my girlfriend she got a funny look on her face, and called me a nerd. Boo! How can people fail to find excitement in something this interesting??
October 2, 2009 at 3:20 pm
she probably didn’t understand is my guess.
October 1, 2009 at 7:59 am
[…] on the Progressive vision of the Privileges or Immunities clause, especially in light of the Question Presented in McDonald v. Chicago. I am currently working on an article, approriately entitled Opening Pandora’s Box. The […]
October 4, 2009 at 2:26 pm
[…] One of the Yale Professors sitting behind me complemented my ability to type so quickly and still comprehend the conference. I suppose three years of law school multitasking have prepared me for paying attention to professors, vociferously typing, surfing the web, and adding commentary. Only thing I added was taking pictures, which was pretty cool. A special treat was that Yale’s ISP provides ESPN360.com, so I was able to watch Penn State route Illinois yesterday while I was liveblogging. Yet another not unwelcome, defeat for Chicago this week! Let’s hope bad things come in three for Chicago with respect to McDonald v. Chicago. […]
October 7, 2009 at 5:37 pm
[…] blogged,the Supreme Court granted cert in McDonald v. Chicago, and in the question presented, queried whether incorporation can be accomplished through the privileges or immunities clause of the 14th […]