October Term 2018

 

Case

Question(s) Presented

Appeal From

 Status

Notes

Copland v. Vance
18-918

Whether a plaintiff need show that a law is vague in all of its applications to succeed in a facial vagueness challenge. CA2 Petition for writ of certiorari
01/15/2019
Knife rights case on standing, not merits. 

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. NYC 
18-280

Whether the 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.  CA2 Distributed for Conference
1/18/2019
(1st relist)
 

Rogers v. Grewal 
18-824

  1. Whether the Second Amendment protects the right to carry a firearm outside the home for self-defense.
  2. Whether the government may deny categorically the exercise of the right to carry a firearm outside the home to typical law-abiding citizens by conditioning the exercise of the right on a showing of a special need to carry a firearm.
 CA3 Petition for writ of certiorari
12/20/2018
 

Rehaif v. United States 
17-9560

Whether the “knowingly” provision of § 924(a)(2) applies to both the possession and status elements of a § 922(g) crime, as has been urged by then-Judge, now Justice Gorsuch, or whether it applies only to the possession element, as has been held by the courts.  CA11 Petition Granted 1/11/2019 

The Volokh Conspiracy: 
Illegal Aliens, Guns, and Strict Liability

Mance v. Whitaker
18-663

The question presented is whether prohibiting interstate handgun sales, facially or as-applied to consumers whose home jurisdictions authorize such transactions, violates the Second Amendment and the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment’s Due Process Clause  CA5 Response due 1/22/2019  

 Pena v. Lindley
18-843

 

The question presented is whether California’s “Unsafe Handgun Act,” Cal. Penal Code § 31900 et seq., violates the Second Amendment by banning handguns of the kind in common use for traditional lawful purposes. CA9  Response due 2/4/2019  

 Gould v. Morgan
18A660

   CA1 Petition for writ of certiorari due 04/01/2019 Comm2A Right-to-carry case against  Boston and Brookline

 Kisor v. Wilkie
18-16

  1. Whether the Court should overrule Auer and Seminole Rock
  2. Alternatively, whether Auer deference should yield to a substantive canon of construction.
 CAFC Petition Granted (Question 1 Only)
12/10/2018
 

Kettler v. US
18-936

  1. Whether the National Firearms Act of 1934, upheld in Sonzinsky, continues to be a constitutional exercise of Congress’s taxing power when the justifications for that decision have significantly eroded over the last 82 years.
  2. Whether the Second Amendment protects firearm accessories such as sound suppressors.
  3. Whether the tax imposed by the National Firearms Act, targeting the exercise of a Second Amendment right, violates the rule of Murdock v. Pennsylvania, 319 U.S. 105 (1943) and Cox v. New Hampshire, 312 U.S. 669 (1941).
CA10   Gun Owners of America challenge to the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act (NFA) of 1934

Rothery v. Blanas
18-121

  1. Does California’s general prohibition to carry a loaded handgun outside the home, coupled with an arbitrary and capricious licensing scheme for citizens who wish to carry a concealed weapon, violate Californians’ fundamental right to keep and bear arms for self-defense guaranteed by the Second Amendment?
  2. Does California’s grant of a lifetime right to honorably retired California peace officers to carry a concealed weapon, coupled with a grant of unbridled discretion to each elected Sheriff whereby concealed weapon permits are issued on a quid pro quo basis to political supporters, violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment when average citizens, including former military, are subjected to the capriciousness of the locally elected Sheriff?
CA9 Petition Denied
11/05/2018