Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Page 1 of 4 PageID 62
Plaintiff,
v.
ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General of
the United States, and B. TODD JONES,
Director, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms
& Explosives,
Defendants.
Plaintiff challenges 18 U.S.C. 922(o), the federal ban on possession of a machine gun
2.
Page 2 of 4 PageID 63
Plaintiffs complaint raises four separate causes of action, alleging violations of four
separate provisions of the United States Constitution, including the right to bear arms in the
Second Amendment, the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment, the Equal Protection
Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and the list of powers provided to Congress by Article I.
3.
Under the two-step framework for analyzing firearms restrictions challenged on Second
Amendment grounds adopted by the Fifth Circuit, see Natl Rifle Assn (NRA) v. ATF, 700
F.3d 185, 194 (5th Cir. 2012), Defendants memorandum of law will attempt to explain the
historic traditions associated with the Second Amendment guarantee and how those relate to the
federal ban on machine guns. Id. Defendants memorandum must also analyze whether the
statute satisfies the appropriate level of means-end scrutiny in the event the Court seeks to look
beyond Defendants analysis of the historic traditions of the Second Amendment. Id.
4.
regulate interstate commerce under the Commerce Clause, Defendants memorandum of law will
attempt to thoroughly explain the statutory framework as described above.
5.
jurisdiction under Article III, contending that Plaintiff lacks standing to raise his Second
Amendment and Commerce Clause claims because he has not identified a redressable injury that
is traceable to the federal ban on machine guns.
6.
Because of the multiple constitutional provisions at issue, the ten additional pages
requested are necessary for Defendants to provide the statutory and historic background and
analysis to adequately address the constitutional challenges raised by Plaintiffs complaint.
Defendants respectfully submit that this Court would benefit from a full analysis of the issues
presented here. The interests of justice will therefore be served by the requested extension.
7.
Page 3 of 4 PageID 64
Undersigned counsel has conferred with counsel for Plaintiff, who does not oppose the
Defendants, therefore, respectfully ask this Court to enter an order granting them an eleven-page
extension of the ordinary page limit.
Dated: January 16, 2015
Respectfully submitted,
JOYCE R. BRANDA
Acting Assistant Attorney General
JOHN R. PARKER
Acting United States Attorney
/s/ Eric J. Soskin
DIANE KELLEHER
Assistant Branch Director
ERIC J. SOSKIN (PA Bar # 200663)
DANIEL RIESS
Trial Attorneys
U.S. Department of Justice
Civil Division, Rm. 7116
20 Massachusetts Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20530
Telephone: (202) 353-30533
Fax: (202) 616-8460
Email: Eric.Soskin@usdoj.gov
Attorneys for Defendants
Page 4 of 4 PageID 65
CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
Pursuant to Local Rule 7.1(a) and (b), I hereby certify that on January 13, 2015, I
conferred with Counsel for Plaintiff regarding the relief sought in this motion. Counsel indicated
that Plaintiff does not oppose the relief sought in this motion.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
On January 16, 2015, I electronically submitted the foregoing document with the clerk of
court for the U.S. District Court, Northern District of Texas, using the electronic case filing
system of the court. I hereby certify that I have served all parties electronically or by another
manner authorized by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b)(2) or the local rules.