NRA Amicus Brief Summary

NRA Amicus Brief Summary

Write a one-page summation of the NRA’s argument.  Then, in a second page, answer the following questions:

1.  Does the NRA want the U.S. Supreme Court to affirm or overrule the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit’s opinion?

2.  Why?

Your submission should adhere to the following guidelines:

·  The total length of your paper should be a minimum of 2 full pages in length.

·  Use APA style for general formatting, including margins, font type and font size, spacing, and cover page.

·  Include Bluebook formatted citations within the body of the paper and on the References page.

Check tips on how to do your homework-help-services/

NRA Amicus Brief Summary

1. What is the main argument of the NRA’s amicus brief in District of Columbia v. Heller?,

2. How does the NRA interpret the Second Amendment?,

3. What historical evidence does the NRA rely on?,

4. Does the NRA want the Supreme Court to affirm or overrule the D.C. Circuit’s opinion?,

5. Why does the NRA support that position?

Comprehensive Answer

Page 1: Summation of NRA’s Argument

In its amicus curiae brief in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the National Rifle Association (NRA) argued strongly in favor of an individual right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment. The NRA’s central claim was that the Second Amendment does not limit its protections to state militias but instead secures the rights of private citizens to possess firearms for lawful purposes, including self-defense.

The NRA emphasized historical context, pointing to the framers’ intent, early constitutional debates, and legal traditions that recognized individual rights to arms. It argued that the D.C. handgun ban violated this constitutional guarantee by effectively disarming law-abiding citizens. The brief criticized the District’s laws as extreme, noting that requiring firearms to be stored in an inoperable state deprived citizens of any practical ability to defend themselves.

Additionally, the NRA contended that interpreting the Second Amendment as a collective right tied exclusively to militias would render the amendment nearly meaningless. Instead, the NRA maintained that the text “the right of the people” clearly refers to individuals, consistent with other constitutional provisions such as the First and Fourth Amendments.

Overall, the NRA urged the Court to affirm the fundamental nature of the right to keep and bear arms and to strike down the D.C. laws as unconstitutional.

Page 2: Questions Answered

1. Does the NRA want the U.S. Supreme Court to affirm or overrule the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit’s opinion?
   The NRA wants the Supreme Court to affirm the Court of Appeals’ ruling.

2. Why?
   The NRA supports affirmance because the D.C. Circuit recognized the Second Amendment as protecting an individual right to own firearms, not merely a collective right connected to militia service. The NRA argued that this interpretation aligns with the historical understanding of the amendment, preserves citizens’ ability to defend themselves, and prevents governments from passing laws that effectively nullify constitutional rights. By affirming, the Supreme Court would establish a clear precedent that the Second Amendment protects personal firearm ownership and invalidates laws that unduly restrict that right.