The following current cases that infringe upon or deny US Constitutional civil rights under the 2nd Amendment are being litigated by the Madison Society Foundation as either a plaintiff, legal support or amicus participant:
Make a general donation to the Madison Society Foundation 2nd Amendment Litigation Support Fund here!
Garcia vs Harris
|06/10/2016||California Senate Bill 707 (2015)|
|06/10/2016||Notice of Motion to Dismiss Complaint by California Attorney General Kamala D Harris|
|06/10/2016||Request for Judicial Notice Filed in Support of Motion to Dismiss Complaint by California Attorney General Kamala D Harris|
|07/18/2016||Plaintiffs' Opposition to Motion to Dismiss|
|07/18/2016||Plaintiffs' Objection to Defendant's Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Motion to Dismiss|
|08/08/2016||Plaintiffs' Opposition to Motion to Dismiss|
|08/08/2016||Plaintiffs' Objection to Defendant's Request for Judicial Notice in Support of Motion to Dismiss|
We have filed an Amicus Curiae brief.
Peruta v. County of San Diego (10-56971, 11-16255)
|06/24/2016||Order for Appeals|
|06/23/2016||Appellants’ Petition for Full Court En Banc Rehearing 10-56971|
|06/23/2016||Appellants’ Petition for Full Court En Banc Rehearing 11-16255|
|01/01/2016||Oral Argument Summary|
|04/30/2015||Brief Of Amicus Curae|
|04/30/2015||Motion for Leave|
This case has been briefed and we are waiting for the court to set oral argument.
Plaintiffs' response to order to show cause.
Case is stayed pending Richards and Peruta which is under submission to the court.
This court must start clarifying the scope of the second amendment right because the lower courts are hopelessly confused-many act as if Heller never happened and this cause presents an excellent vehicle for doing so.
On July 29, 2009, the Ninth Circuit vacated an April 20 panel decision and reheard the case en banc on September 24, 2009. The April 20 decision had held that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments, while also upholding an Alameda County, California ordinance that makes it a crime to bring a gun or ammunition on to, or possess either while on, county property. The en banc panel remanded the case to the three-judge panel. On May 2, 2011, that panel ruled that intermediate scrutiny was the correct standard by which to judge the ordinance's constitutionality and remanded the case to the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. On November 28, 2011, the Ninth Circuit vacated the panel's May 2 decision and agreed to rehear the case en banc. View the current ruling regarding mediation from the 9th US Circut Court of Appeals.
We won the right to hold gun shows at the Alamedia County fairgrounds with "tethered" guns. We are workikng on securing some dates for 2013. We lost the right to recover lost profits and fee/costs.
We may be in for more gun show litigation as the frenzy of anti-gun fervor sweeps the nation.
Richard v. Harris - Closed
Challenge to CA Assault Weapon Statutes on "vague and ambiguous" grounds. Suit is designed to force the CA DOJ to issue definitive statement that AR-type rifles (and others) equipped with bullet-buttons are NOT illegal in CA This case also challenges the warrantless search of gun owners by the police under Penal Code § 12031(e).
Haynie v. Harris - Closed
Another challenge to the CA ASW act. We are trying to force the DOJ to issue a bulletin sanctioning the bullet button equipped rifles.
People v. Hordman - Closed
This case is on appeal. The issue deals with unloaded open carry in state parks for protection from Mountain Lions.
Richards v. Prieto - Closed
(Yolo County) - A case designed to test the requirement of "good cause" and "good moral character" for issuance of CCW permit. The case is on appeal with the Ninth Circuit and may be related to and argued at the same time as Peruta v. Dan Diego.
Pena v. Cid - Closed
This case challenges the California "Safe Handgun List."
The charges are; 12021(C)(1), 12020(A)(2), & 12280(A)(1) which are felonies and challenge the Constitutional rights to travel with out the fear of having any product that is unlawful in California confiscated. (Oregon resident). This has been set for trial in June. We are in the process of filing a motion which will have an impact on all citizens who travel Interstate with firearms that are legal in their home State but are illegal in a State they pass through. This is pursuant to US Code, Title 18, Section 926A.