Constitutional Law

Dave Kopel on amicus briefs

Dave Kopel has an excellent series of posts on the amicus briefs over at The Volokh Conspiracy. Good comments on each, too, in terms of how well-written it was and what effect it might have. He points out that the Solicitor General's brief was filed late at night and showed signs of hasty preparation. I think I found a couple of typos in, in a hasty skim. He suggests it might be the product of last minute changes, perhaps a change from strict scrutiny to intermediate review (as the Libertarian amicus points out, the SG cited cases which simply have no relevance to the case -- could be the result of a sudden change and people scrambling to find precedent).

By my count, which may be off, Heller is supported by 46 amici. Some don't do that much, but the great majority are powerful. And they're spread out, not piling in behind each other. The PA brief takes on details of PA history. Cato and Joyce Malcolm take on the English right. Academics covers ratification. Others deal with the great commentators, the 14th Amendment, four deal with standard of review,

In terms of authority, 30 state Attys General (vs, what, 5 for DC), a majority of both Houses of Congress (vs. 19 for DC), Two former US Atty General and a former Solicitor General (Robert Bork, a surprise, last I heard he was anti-individual right, but I also heard a rumor he was reconsidering in light of the literature).

Full post as published by Of Arms and the Law on February 12, 2008 (boomark / email).