---

continued from page 2>>

The Second Amendment easily passes those tests. To begin with, the very text of the Second Amendment declares that it protects something that is requisite to a free society. That is, "necessary to the security of a free State."

In addition, the Heller decision itself quoted sources that affirmed the right to arms and to self-defense are "fundamental." Among them was St. George Tucker, the leading legal scholar of the early republic, who wrote the Second Amendment is "the true palladium of liberty" and "the right to self-defense is the first law of nature."

The Supreme Court has often looked to state practices to decide which rights are embedded in our American bedrock of liberty. Again, the evidence for incorporation is overpowering—44 state constitutions protect the right to arms.

The right to arms is the very reason why the government of the United States exists. As the NRA brief explains, "This case is before the Supreme Court of the United States of America precisely because Redcoats marched on Concord in April of 1775 to seize weapons and gunpowder, and were met by colonists jealous of their right to keep and bear arms who fired the first shots of the War of Independence."

British General Thomas Gage's subsequent confiscation of arms from the people of Boston "would be among the grievances detailed in the Declaration of Causes of Taking Up Arms of July 6, 1775."

From that April morning in 1775, to the frontier of the growing nation, to the present, the right to arms has always been at the center of our liberty. Thus, "In comparison to the right to keep and bear arms, no right has deeper roots in our history, no right is more essential to the preservation of all rights and no right has a stronger claim to fundamental status."

Part III of the brief is shorter and shifts the argument from the Due Process clause to the Privileges or Immunities clause. The brief suggests the Supreme Court's three 19th century decisions in which it rejected Second Amendment arguments are all distinguishable: United States v. Cruikshank (which was brought under the Enforcement Act of 1870) involved misconduct by private citizens, not by a government; Presser v. Illinois (1886) simply held that holding a mass armed parade without a permit is not part of the Second Amendment right; and Miller v. Texas (1895) rejected the defendant's Second Amendment claim on appeal because he had not raised the issue in the trial court.

Accordingly, argues the NRA brief, the Supreme Court does not need to overrule any precedent in order to make the Second Amendment applicable to the states via the Privileges or Immunities clause.

Finally, Part IV briefly addresses and supports the main argument in the Gura brief: the Slaughter-House Cases should be overruled and the Supreme Court should make a fresh start on Privileges or Immunities jurisprudence. That would be a perfectly good result, but whether five justices of the Supreme Court are willing to go that far remains to be seen.

Poss explained the strategic choices: "The NRA brief is aimed purely at the singular goal of incorporating the Second Amendment so as to provide nationwide protection of Second Amendment rights," he said. "Thus we provided the Supreme Court with a menu of arguments demonstrating that the court does not need to overrule or reverse any precedent in order to incorporate the Second Amendment under the Due Process Clause and also showing an alternative route to incorporation via the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

"I am immensely proud of the combined work of our team on this brief."

As an NRA member, you should be, too. Your association began fighting for civil rights in 1871 and it is continuing that fight in the 21st century with superb legal work worthy of the immense issues that are at stake.