Blog Archives

Who Gets A Felon’s Guns ?

It was bitterly cold outside the Supreme Court this morning which may explain why there were fewer spectators than usual for today’s arguments.

 

These sketches are of the first argument, Henderson v. U.S., concerning a felon’s attempt to transfer ownership of a gun collection that as a result of his conviction he was no longer allowed to possess. Tony Henderson, who pleaded guilty to marijuana distribution, asked that the firearms, which had no part of his crime, be sold to a friend or transferred to his wife. The government refused, of course, pointing out that such a close connection to the recipient amounted to “constructive possession“.

 

Henderson’s lawyer, UVa law professor Daniel Ortiz, began his argument stating that his client was willing to have the guns sold by a federally dealer, though that was not his preference. That seemed fairly reasonable and straight forward to me – hey, even a non-lawyer like me might be able to follow this argument. But then they pulled out the scalpels and started dissecting the meaning of possession, forfeiture, due process, dominion and takings. “Well, it’s a kind of complicated transaction . . . , Your Honor”, responded Ortiz to a question from Justice Kagan.

 

For its part, the government was okay with letting a dealer sell the guns. But when it came to who picks the dealer the lawyer for the government faced some tough questions, especially from Scalia.

Posted in Arguments, Supreme Court, Uncategorized Tagged with: , , ,

Hey, I Made The ABA Journal Blawg 100, Again!

BasicIllustratorFileLetter—CS

If you like my blog please vote for it here. Thanks!

Posted in Uncategorized Tagged with: ,

2776

U.S. v. Rock 'n Roll, No. 2776

My contribution to 2776: The Album. You may have seen the liner notes in last week’s New Yorker or  heard Neko Case’s track, “These Aren’t The Droids”.

Posted in History, Supreme Court, Uncategorized Tagged with: ,

Tradition vs. Transparency

My sketch of a panel discussion hosted by The Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press on transparency – read cameras – in the Supreme Court that took place at The National Press Club this morning.

The panel, from right to left, was composed of Alan Morrisson, Pete Williams, Neal Katyal, Maureen O’Connor, Ken Starr and moderator Tony Mauro. They all pretty much agreed – with a teeny bit of reservation from Katyal – that cameras are inevitable and belong in the Supreme Court.

Posted in Supreme Court, Uncategorized Tagged with:

Go Tigers!

Tigers111011_fans
Moving beyond courtroom into the wider arena of reportage drawing, here are a few sketches from Tuesday night’s Tigers/Rangers game at Comerica Park. Tigers111011_Comerica

Tigers111011_towel

Tigers111011_hats

Tigers111011

Posted in Uncategorized Tagged with: ,
BasicIllustratorFileLetter—CS
2013_Blawg100Honoree_300x300
TWITTER @courtartist

Blog Updates

Enter your name and email below to receive blog updates via email.