”Nothing in Defense of Our Life Is Immoral,”
”any method of protecting ourselves is morally right.”
~ ~ Marcus Cicero, 51 B.C.
First there was. . . D.C. vs. HELLER-1,
next came . . . Heller-II & Heller-III. . . and NOW Heller-VI
with more on the drawing board.
then there was. . . McDONALD vs. Chicago,
followed by . . . . . . NYS Rifle & Pistol vs. Bruen
. . . and now the HELLER Foundation Joined and / or Supported
the Following Firearms Cases….
____________________
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
The Supreme Court Second Amendment Case being heard on Nov 3, 2021 is known as
NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSN. V. BRUEN .
This case has much deeper roots than would appear on the surface.
It is generally thought of as a GUN case, a CCL case, or a Concealed Carry License case which the City of NY. . . ONLY issues to it's elite Friends, Political allies, or Cronies.
What we have here is a Freedom issue.
The legal mechanics are, “WHO is Sovereign”. . .
The People or bureaucrats, that never had a productive job and have bodyguards that the citizens pay for,
YET...
those very same citizens are denied the same services they are actually paying for.
LINK . . . TO THE Gun Owners of America and HELLER FOUNDATION Amicus Brief:
https://GunOwners.com/images/pdf/NYSRPA-amicus-brief-final.pdf
LISTEN . . . TO THE ORAL ARGUMENTS:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3RRRZl89JU
~ ~ ~
No. 22-842
__________________
IN THE Supreme Court of the United States
NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA, Petitioner,
vs.
MARIA T. VULLO, Respondent.
On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the
United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
Brief Amicus Curiae of Gun Owners of America, Inc.,
Gun Owners (of America) Foundation, Gun Owners of California,
Heller Foundation,
America’s Future, Citizens United,
Citizens United Foundation,
Public Advocate of the United States,
Leadership Institute, Free Speech Coalition,
Free Speech Defense and Education Fund,
DownsizeDC.org, Downsize DC Foundation,
U.S. Constitutional Rights Legal Defense Fund, and
Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund in Support of Petitioner
RICK BOYER, JEREMIAH L. MORGAN (*Counsel of Record )
WILLIAM J. OLSON & P.C., ROBERT J. OLSON,
INTEGRITY LAW FIRM,
P.O. Box 10953 Lynchburg, VA 24506, 370 Maple Ave. W., Ste. 4 Vienna, VA 22180
Attorneys for Amici Curiae May 24, 2023
~ ~ ~
NY State, Abuse of Power, Corruption, Oper. Choke-Point off-the-record,
Attempt to Gun - Grab a Whole Corporation of Gun Owners !!
N.Y. State’s Chief Maria VULLO, Dept. of Financial Services (“DFS”), wields broad power over
it’s banks and other financial institutions.
From this Position of POWER, in April 2018, along with former NY Governor Andrew Cuomo, they “‘urged all banks & insurance companies doing business in New York to. . . . discontinue their arrangements with the NRA.’”
This was accompanied by threats such as, it is your “corporate social responsibility,” you are exposed to “reputational risk,” and further “‘dealings with the NRA’” could produce “social backlash” against those who show public support of the Second Amendment.
#
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Lori Rodriguez vs. San Jose City
GUN GRAB. . . CORRUPTION. . .
May 20, 2020: Today the Heller Foundation joined Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners of California, and Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund, and others to file the only amicus curiae brief in support of a challenge by Lori Rodriguez vs. San Jose City, Calif.
Mrs. Rodriguez kept her guns LOCKED in a safe while her husband had a one-time mental episode but had no key or combination access to the safe. While Mr. Rodriguez went to the hospital the police did a warrant-less seizure of her firearms property. Even though she could legally go purchase another gun at any time [she is NOT A "Prohibited Person"], the city kept the seized guns for 7-plus years.
San Jose City will not return the the property under the 9th Circuit Court’s newly fabricated lawless corrupt concept, “that California may seize and refuse to return [a dozen] all the firearms that a person owns, so long as the person retains the right to go out and purchase another firearm.“ !!
THIS CASE from the Ninth Circuit Court is about much more than the 2nd Amendment.
[4th, 5th, (8th ??), 14th] Because her husband might be a “Prohibited Person” the 9-th Circuit has silently adopted this anti-woman policy despite Petitioner’s full compliance with Calif. laws. The court’s anti-gun stance trades off & validates the theory that “exercising Gun Rights automatically diminishes other 4th-Amend. rights which can be forfeited,”. . . hence the warrant-less seizure !! The result of these decisions is a de-facto, using Justice Scalia’s phrase, “erasing” the exercise of one’s 2-AM Rights.
5/21/20
This 20 page Amicus is an exciting & easy read for all gun owners. The Amicus Link is. . .
http://www.LawAndFreedom.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2020/05/Rodriguez-Amicus-Brief.pdf
OTHER Current Cases:
Kim Rhodes vs. Becerra, AG of CAL. . . Ammo Purchases are technical & Complicated. . . Need Special registeration for AMMO !!
Virginia Duncan vs. Becerra. . . California has filed a request for a full en banc review of the Duncan v. Becerra case with the Ninth Circuit. . . California has one of the most draconian and confiscatory magazine bans in the nation.
____________________
SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
ACCEPTS for REVIEW the NY State Rifle & Pistol Assoc. vs. NY CITY.
May 14, 2019
N.Y. RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOC.
On Writ of Certiorari ~ GRANTED (now remanded back to NY)
____________________
Today we filed an amicus brief in support of a challenge to New York City’s near prohibition on
transporting firearms. The New York City law only allows transportation of firearms from their permitted location to
and from gun ranges within the city limits. May 24, 2019
ISSUE ~ Transporting Firearms is Not Allowed ~ Whether New York City’s ban on transporting a licensed, locked and unloaded handgun to a home or shooting range outside city limits is consistent with the Second Amendment, the Commerce Clause and
the constitutional right to travel.
=======
Attached is the brief we filed on June 24, 2019 today in the Johnson v. United States case,
asking the Supreme Court to re-examine the STOP & FRISK doctrine.
Please post it on your websites and elsewhere to advance the ideas discussed therein and steer your people & networks to the www.HellerFoundation.org in support of the HELLER-4, now HELLER-6, case against Gun Bans.
The best Assurance of your Gun Freedoms is to send us a Monthly Box of AMMO.
=======
THIS CASE WILL BREAK YOUR HEART. . .
DENIED REVIEW BY THE SUPREME COURT
!! DOE vs. WOODARD ~
When her 4-year-old daughter was STRIP-SEARCHED & PHOTOGRAPHED after the SIXTH ANONYMOUS PHONE CALL…
DOE’S Mother said, “ENOUGH !!”
In the Writ of Certiorari (appeal) to the Supreme Court, reference is made to the
RED FLAG LAWS of about a dozen states. It is easy to infer how easily harassment of Owners of Firearms
can be effected and condoned. C A S E R E J E C T E D !!
See . . .
http://LawAndFreedom.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Doe-v-Woodard-Amicus-Brief.pdf
No. 18-1173
==========================================
In The
Supreme Court of the United States
________________________
I.B. AND JANE DOE, Petitioners,
v.
APRIL WOODARD, ET AL., Respondents.
____________________
On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to
the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
____________________
Brief Amicus Curiae of:
Gun Owners Foundation,
Gun Owners of America, Inc.,
Public Advocate of the United States,
Downsize DC Foundation,
DownsizeDC.org,
The Heller Foundation,
Conservative Legal Defense and Education Fund,
Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation, and
Restoring Liberty Action Committee in Support of Petitioners
---------------------------------
WILLIAM J. OLSON. P.C.
and
JOSEPH W. MILLER
RESTORING LIBERTY
ACTION COMMITTEE
William J. Olson WRIT / brief:
http://LawAndFreedom.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2019/04/Doe-v-Woodard-Amicus-Brief.pdf
UPDATE ~ ~ 5/20/19. . .
Sadly, this morning the Supreme Court denied Certiorari in this case --
Doe v. Woodard. This really is a disappointment. Warrantless and un-warranted strip search and
photographing of a four-year-old-girl; “Qualified Immunity” for the government agent….
~ ~ ~ ~
ScotusBlog.com . . . Doe & I.B v. Woodard . . . Petition for Certiorari denied on May 20, 2019
Issues:
(1) Whether the 4th Amendment requires a case-worker who suspects abuse to obtain a
warrant to strip-search a child.
(2) whether, even if a warrant is not required in this context, clearly established federal law prohibits conducting
warrantless strip searches of children at school when there are no “specific suspicions” of danger or wrongdoing
justifying the “categorically extreme intrusiveness of a search down to the body”; and
(3) whether the Supreme Court should reconsider its Qualified-Immunity jurisprudence to accord with historical
common-law practice and to eliminate the widespread confusion plaguing current qualified-immunity doctrine.
=======
JEREMY KETTLER, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ~
convicted of possessing an unregistered firearm suppressor
BRIEF: http://LawAndFreedom.com/wordpress/jeremy-kettler-v-united-states/
BRIEF: http://LawAndFreedom.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Kettler-Petition-for-Certiorari.pdf
I regret to inform you that the petition for writ of certiorari was denied this morning without comment.
Thank you for the opportunity to have represented you. Mark Brewer, Esq. Attorney of Record
No. 18-936
=================================
IN THE
Supreme Court of the United States
____________________
JEREMY KETTLER, Petitioner,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent.
---------------------------------------
On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari
to the United States Court of Appeals
for the_Tenth Circuit
---------------------------
Brief Amicus Curiae of:
Downsize DC Foundation,
DownsizeDC.org,
Tennessee Firearms Association
and
The Heller Foundation
in Support of Petitioner
-----------------------
J. MARK BREWER
and
JAMES CLYMER
February 19, 2019
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Brewer WRIT for Certiorari:
https://www.SupremeCourt.gov/DocketPDF/18/18-936/88832/20190219144956757_18-936%20Amicus%20Brief.pdf
William J. Olson WRIT for Certiorari:
http://LawAndFreedom.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/Kettler-Petition-for-Certiorari.pdf
YOUNG v. HAWAII ~ A Concealed Carry case
Nov.19, 2018 . . . Today we filed an amicus brief opposing a request for rehearing by the State of Hawaii of a Ninth Circuit decision
which overturned Hawaii’s virtual ban on citizens bearing weapons. We opposed Hawaii’s argument that its laws
against carrying firearms were long-standing, explaining that those laws existed when Hawaii was a monarchy where
the reigning king or queen was sovereign — not as in the United States where the people are sovereign.
PERUTA vs. SAN DIEGO COUNTY ~
San Diego County Sheriff approved Peruta’s Concealed Carry Application (CCL) and
the 9th Circuit Appeals Court reversed that decision.
SOTO v. BUSHMASTER case
=======
ROBINSON
July 24, 2017 . . . . A police stop must be based on two separate factors: that an individual is both “armed” and “dangerous.”
By conflating these two tests, the court not only sanctioned police violation of the Fourth Amendment,
it revealed its hostility to this Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. HELLER, recognizing an
individual right to keep and bear arms.
Police in W.VA had a citizen's report of a man loading a handgun in a 7-11 parking lot. Robinson was subsequently pulled over for not having his seat belt buckled up and then illegally searched and then seized his firearm. Since the "Terry Stop" conditions of being both Armed AND Dangerous were disregarded, the police acted in a way that grants no 4th Amend. protections to motorists.
Presented to The Court: ...."those who possess a Concealed Carry Permit are 259 times less likely to violate the law than members of the general public - - and they are even 7 times less likely to commit a crime than police themselves !"
Similarly also, the state of Texas reveals that a Concealed Carry Permit holder is nearly 407 times less likely to commit a crime than a member of the general public.
What these studies show is the opposite of what the 4th Circuit assumed: the presence of a legally armed person at a traffic stop presents virtually no danger to the police whatsoever.
BRIEF: http://LawAndFreedom.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Robinson-v-US-Amicus-Brief-final.pdf
=======
HAMILTON case
=======
KOLBE v. Hogan, Gov. of Maryland ~ Supreme Court of the United States
Amicus Curiae Brief of Gun Owners of America, GOA Foundation, Citizens United, C.U Foundation, Conservative Legal Defense and ed. Fund, and The Heller Foundation for petitioners, August 25, 2017 ~
STATEMENT ~ The Fourth Circuit spent the first two pages of its opinion discussing this nation’s worst mass murders involving firearms. Kolbe v. Hogan, 849 F.3d 114, 120 (4th Cir. 2017). Then, the court devoted several pages to the alleged evil of what the Maryland legislature pejoratively has termed “assault weapons” and “large capacity magazines.” Id. at 120-25. The circuit court then concluded that not only are such weapons not protected by the Second Amendment, the Second Amendment does not even come into play. Id. at 130. Based on that analysis, it affirmed the decision of the district court dismissing the challenge to the Maryland Firearms Safety Act. Id.
SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT ~ If Kolbe had been a First Amendment’s case, the Fourth Circuit’s opinion below no doubt would have triggered summary reversal. Applying the reasoning it used in this case to a law banning cell phones, computers, and Internet usage by citizens, would have resulted in a decision that such modern methods of communication are completely outside the scope of the First Amendment’s protection — and then a declaration that the freedom of speech is alive and well.
Clearly, any form of freedom brings with it a certain amount of risk….
They apparently believe that it is not gun violence — but gun rights themselves — that are the real problem, and that their role as federal judges obligates them to protect the People from their Constitutional Rights.
BRIEF: http://LawAndFreedom.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/08/Kolbe-SCOTUS-Amicus-Brief.pdf
=======
CARPENTER v. U.S.A ~ Supreme Court of the United States
Amicus Curiae Brief of Gun Owners of America…. The Heller Foundation… et. al.
Today, we filed an amicus curiae brief in the United States Supreme Court on the merits, arguing that the govt may not seize and search your cell phone’s cell site location information without a warrant. This brief follows two briefs that we filed on this same issue in United States v. Graham, and one in United States v. Zodhiates. August 14, 2017. It has application to 2nd Amendment in that govt may not spy and track anyone w/o a warrant, especially law abiding citizens exercising their Constitutional Rights.
BRIEF: http://LawAndFreedom.com/wordpress/carpenter-v-united-states/
=======
COLLINS v. Commonwealth of Virginia ~ Supreme Court of the United States
Amicus Curiae Brief of Gun Owners of America…. The Heller Foundation… et. al.
A brief was filed based on the 4th Amendment Right of citizens being secure in their “"Person, House, Papers, and Effects.” One can see it’s 2nd Amendment application as Virginia’s “Automobile Exception” is based on the erroneous claim that readily mobile “Effects” deserve less of the 4th Amend. protection. November 20, 2017
BRIEF: http://LawAndFreedom.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/Collins-v-Commonwealth-Amicus-Brief-SCOTUS-16-1027.pdf
=======
HOLLIS vs. ATTY. GEN HOLDER ~ Machine Gun Case, 5th Circuit Court, New Orleans
=======
|
WATSON vs. Atty.Gen. LYNCH ~ Machine Gun Case, 3rd Circuit Court, Phila.
##