For information on the Colorado Sheriffs' lawsuit against the 2013 anti-gun laws, click here.
Kerr v. Hickenlooper (Nov. 20, 2014). Independence Institute, Cato Institute, Reason Foundation amicus brief in support of cert. petition. The court granted cert., vacated the Tenth Circuit decision, and remanded for further proceedings.
Joel Esquenzi and Carlos Rodriguez v. United States of America. Washington Legal Foundation and the Independence Institute amicus brief in support of petitioners. Sept. 11, 2014.
Zivotofsky v. Kerry (2014). Kopel joined other professors of constitutional and international law. Argues that precedent and practice show that Congress has the authority to designate that particular locations will be treated as part of a particular nation, for purposes such as passport issuance, tariffs, and so on. Brief primarily written by Alan Gura and Eugene Kontorovich. Supreme Court amicus brief in support of petitioner.
National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning (2014). Amicus brief of the Independence Institute. Original meaning of the Recess Appointments Clause. Professor Natelson's research presented in this brief was cited several times in the four-Justice concurring opinion written by Justice Scalia.
Bakoss v. Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London Issuing Certificate No. 0510135 (2013). Amicus brief in support of a petition for a writ of certiorari. The Federal Arbitration Act does not authorize federal courts to create federal common law about the definition of "arbitration." Contract law authority resides in the States.
Department of Health and Human Services v. Florida (2012). Amicus brief of the Independence Institute and of the authors of The Origins of the Necessary and Proper Clause. Chief Justice Roberts' opinion for the Court on this issue included the first Court citation of Chief Justice Marshall's newspaper essays explicating the meaning of McCulloch v. Maryland, which we had presented in our brief.
Florida v. Department of Health and Human Services (2012). Independence Institute amicus brief. The Obamacare Medicaid mandate (that states must drastically expand Medicaid eligibility, or lose all federal matching funds for Medicaid) violates the State sovereignty principles of the Constitution. The Obamacare individual mandate cannot be justified by the original meaning of Necessary and Proper clause. Justice Roberts' opinion on this issue (7-2) appeared to adopt some of the arguments we presented in the brief.
Pleau v. United States and Chafee v. United States (2012). Amicus brief in support of petitions for a writ of certiorari. Principles of federalism forbid the federal government from using a writ of habeas corpus ad testificandum to obtain custody of a prisoner who is serving a sentence in state prison.
McDonald v. Chicago (2010). Amicus brief for a large collection of law enforcement organizations. Social science shows the benefits of arms in the hands of the law-abiding, and the harms of handgun prohibition. Cited by Justice Alito's plurality opinion (footnote 2), and by Justice Stevens' dissent (twice).
District of Columbia v. Heller (2008). Amicus brief for a large coalition of law enforcement. Social science shows that guns in the right hands enhance public safety. Cited four times in Justice Breyer's opinion.
Wisconsin Right to Life v. Federal Election Commission (2006). Independence Institute amicus brief. In support of First Amendment rights of non-profit organizations. (Written by John Bopp).
Florida v. J.L. (2000). Amicus brief filed by the Independence Institute and the National Rifle Association. There is no "gun exception" to the Fourth Amendment's ban on searches based on unverified anonymous tips. (With Robert Dowlut).
Printz v. United States (1997). Amicus brief for the States of Colorado, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, Nebraska, South Dakota, Virginia, and Wyoming. Congress cannot order state and local officials to carry out federal checks on handgun buyers.
Wrenn v. District of Columbia (D.C. Circuit). Amicus brief of legal historians explains that peaceable carrying of arms was lawful in the American colonies, in the Early Republic, and in the vast majority of the United States through 1900.
Peruta v. San Diego. April 30, 2015. En banc rehearing before the 9th Circuit. Amicus brief for the International Law Enforcment Educators & Trainers Association. Explains the empirical evidence showing that licensed handgun carry strengthens public safety.
Shew v. Malloy, no. 14-319-cv (2d Cir. 2014). Amicus brief for S.J. Fjestad (author of The Blue Book of Gun Values and other books on firearms history) and the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence. The history of magazines of greater than 10 rounds, and of magazine prohibition, in the United States.
Fyock v. Sunnyvale, no. 14-15408 (9th Cir. 2014). Amicus brief for Gun Owners of California and the Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence. The history of magazines of greater than 10 rounds, and of magazine prohibition, in the United States.
Kerr v. Hickenlooper, 744 F.3d 1156 (10th Cir. 2014). Amicus brief for Cato Institute and Independence Institute. The Colorado Taxpayer's Bill of Rights provisions for direct democracy are consistent with the original meaning of the Republican Form of Government Clause. Amicus brief in the District Court.
Peruta v. San Diego, 742 F.3d 1144 (9th Cir. 2014). Amicus brief for the International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association, and the Independence Institute. Details why the carrying of an unloaded handgun--which can only be loaded under "imminent" threat--is insufficient to effectuate the constitutional right of armed self-defense. Also details police interests in encouraging concealed carry rather than open carry. Includes numerous short videos to illustrate the brief's descriptions of how guns are loaded, and how they are deployed in an emergency. Case in the District Court (S.D. Cal.): amicus brief for Center for Constitutional Jurisprudence, Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership, Law Enforcement Alliance of America, and Independence Institute. Heller and McDonald recognize the right to bear arms.
Jackson v. San Francisco, 746 F.3d 953 (9th Cir. 2013). Amicus brief of California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation and Independence Institute. Lead author Daniel Peterson. Requirement that guns at home must be locked up when they are not being carried on the person.
Woollard v. Gallagher, 712 F.3d 865 (4th Cir. 2013). Amicus brief of the International Law Enforcement Educators & Trainers Association, International Association of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors, Inc., Prof. Clayton Cramer, and the Independence Institute. Social science re licensed carry.
McKay v. Hutchens (9th Cir. 2012). Amicus brief of the International Law Enforcement Educators & Trainers Association, International Association of Law Enforcement Firearms Instructors, Inc., and the Independence Institute. Right to carry.
Florida v. Department of Health and Human Services, 648 F.3d 1235 (11th Cir. 2011). Independence Institute amicus brief. Explains the original meaning of the Necessary and Proper Clause, and why the individual mandate is neither "necessary" nor "proper."
Seven-Sky v. Holder, 661 F.3d 1 (D.C. Cir 2011). Amicus brief of Authors of The Origins of the Necessary and Proper Clause (Gary Lawson, Robert G. Natelson & Guy Seidman) and the Independence Institute.
Virginia v. Sebelius (4th Cir. 2011). Kopel joins amicus brief of Washington Legal Foundation, and 14 law professors. The Obamacare individual mandate is not "proper" under the Necessary and Proper Clause. Lead attorney was Ilya Somin, of George Mason Law School.
McDonald v. Chicago and NRA v. Chicago, 567 F.3d 856 (7th Cir. 2009). Amicus brief on social science.
Newsom v. Albermarle, 354 F.3d 249 (4th Cir. 2003). A middle school threatened to punish a student for wearing an NRA shooting sports camp t-shirt. The Independence Institute amicus brief argued that shooting sports are wholesome and promote good character, and that speech promoting shooting sports cannot rationally be censored in a public school. The Fourth Circuit ruled in favor of the student. Newsom Wins One, National Review Online. Jan. 8, 2004.
United States v. Emerson, 270 F.3d 203 (5th Cir. 2001). Independence Institute amicus brief. The Second Amendment protects an individual right.
Taxpayers for Public Education v. Douglas County School District (2014). Independence Institute amicus brief to the Colorado Supreme Court in the Douglas County school vouchers case in support of the respondents. Covers empirical and social science issues.
People v. Aguilar (Ill. 2013). Amicus brief of Professors Michael O'Shea, Nicholas Johnson, and David Kopel. (O'Shea was lead author). Illinois's complete prohibition of defensive carry in public places violates the Second Amendment.
Regents of the University of of Colorado v. Students for Concealed Carry on Campus, 271 P.3d 496 (Colo. 2012). Amicus brief for the County Sheriffs of Colorado and the Independence Institute. Licensed carry on campus promotes public safety.
Robertson v. Denver 874 P.2d 325 (Colo. 1993). Colorado Attorney General reply brief in district court. Denver's "assault weapon" ban. Later proceeding, 978 P.2d 156 (Colo. App. 1999) (brief for plaintiffs, with Stephen Halbrook).
Bolden v. State, --- So.3d ----, 2015 WL 5511491 (Ala. Ct. Crim. App. 2015) (Welch, J., dissenting).
Kasler v. Lockyer, 23 Cal.4th 472, 510, 97 Cal.Rptr.2d 334, 360 (Cal. 2000) (concurring opinion by Justice Janice Rogers Brown).
Kasler v. Lungren, 72 Cal.Rptr.2d 260, 265 (Cal. App. 1998) (majority opinion by Associate Justice Morrison).
Rocky Mountain Gun Owners v. Hickenlooper, No. 14CA2178, 2016 WL 1165542 (Colo. App., Mar. 24, 2016) (Graham, J., dissenting).
Students for Concealed Carry on Campus v. Regents of University of Colorado, 280 P.3d 18, 25 (Colo. App. 2010) (opinion for the court by Judge Hawthorne).
State v. DeCiccio, 315 Conn. 79; 105 A.3d 165 (2014).
Gamble v. United States, 30 A.3d 161, 161 n.7 (D.C. App. 2011) (Associate Judge Fisher).
Bach v. New Hampshire Department of Safety. --- A.3d ----, 2016 WL 3086130 (N.H. 2016).
People of the State of New York v. Anthony Trowells. No. 3015/2013 (Aug. 4, 2014; Supreme Court, Bronx County, Part 92) (Justice Troy Webber).
State v. Mendoza, 82 Hawai'i 143, 146 n.4, 920 P.2d 357, 360 n.4 (Haw. 1996) (majority opinion by Justice Klein).
Oregon v. Christian, 274 P.3d 262, 280 n.15, 249 Or. App. 1, 32 n.15 (Or. Ct. App., 2012) (Edmonds, J., dissenting).
Oregon v. Hirsch, 338 Or. 622, 657, 114 P.3d 1104, 1123 (Ore. 2005) (unanimous opinion by Justice Durham).
Mosby v. Devine, 851 A.2d 1031, 1040 (R.I. 2004) (majority opinion by Chief Justice Williams).
Seattle v. Evans, 184 Wash.2d 856 (Wash. 2015) (by both majority and dissent).
State v. Schelin, 147 Wash.2d 562, 588, 5 P.3d 632, 645 (Wash. 2002) (Justice Sanders, dissenting).
State v. Herrmann (Wisc. App., Nov. 24, 2015), no. 2015AP53–CR, 2015 WL 7432597.
Wisconsin v. Fisher, 714 N.W.2d 495 , 511 n. 6 (Wisc., May 17, 2006) (dissenting opinion of Justice N. Patrick Crooks).
State v. Hamdan, 264 Wis.2d 433, 467 n. 23, 665 N.W.2d 785, 802 n. 23 (Wisc. 2003) (majority opinion by Justice David T. Prosser).
Pagel v. Franscell, 57 P.3d 1226, 1234, 1 Media L. Rep. 1923 (Wy. 2002) (Justice Golden, specially concurring).
McDonald v. Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (2010). Kopel's amicus brief is cited in Justice Alito's majority opinion and in Justice Stevens' dissenting opinion.
District of Columbia v. Heller. 554 U.S. 570 (2008). Kopel's brief for the International Law Enforcement Educators and Trainers Association (ILEETA) and other law enforcement organizations is cited four times in Justice Breyer's dissent, examining the pro/con social science on gun ownership.
Heller v. District of Columbia (Heller II), 670 F.3d 1244, 1287 (D.C. Cir. 2011) (Kavanaugh, J., dissenting) (cite to Johnson, Kopel, Mocsary, O'Shea, Firearms Law and the Second Amendment textbook).
United States v. Gonzalez, 792 F.3d 534 (5th Cir. 2015).
Moore v. Madigan, 702 F.3d 933, 940, 948 (7th Cir. 2012) (majority opinion of Judge Posner, and dissenting opinion of Judge Williams).
Ezell v. City of Chicago, 651 F.3d 684, 702 n. 11 (7th Cir. 2011) (Judge Sykes) (commending Kopel article as showing the proper model of "originalist interpretive method as applied to the Second Amendment.").
United States v. Skoien, 587 F.3d 803, 806 n.2 (7th Cir. 2009) (opinion by Judge Sykes).
Peruta v. County of San Diego, --- F.3d ----, 2016 WL 3194315 (9th Cir. 2016).
Teixeira v. County of Alameda, 822 F.3d 1047 (9th Cir. 2016).
Peruta v. San Diego, 742 F.3d 1144, 1163 (9th Cir. 2014).
Silveira v. Lockyer, 328 F.3d 567, 585 n. 92 (9th Cir. 2003) (opinion by Judge Kleinfeld, joined by Judges Kozinski, O'Scannlain, and T.G. Nelson, dissenting from denial of petition for rehearing en banc).
Bonidy v. United States Postal Service, 790 F.3d 1121 (10th Cir. 2015) (Tymkovich, J., concurring & dissenting).
United States v. McCane, 573 F.3d 1037, 1049 n.2 (10th Cir. 2009) (concurring opinion by Judge Tymkovich).
United States v. McElhiney, 275 F.3d 928, 935 n.2 (10th Cir. 2001) (opinion by Judge Henry, joined by Judges Kelly and Holloway).
United States v. Hosford, 82 F.Supp.3d 660 (D. Md. 2015).
Lorenda Moody v. The ARC of Howard County, Inc., 2011 WL 2671385, *5 n.4, 94 Empl. Prac. Dec. P 44,221 (D.Md., July 07, 2011) (Judge Bredar).
United States v. Vargas, 885 F.Supp. 504, 505 n. 1 (S.D.N.Y. 1995) (Judge Vincent Broderick). An Appendix to the opinion reprints Judge Broderick's article "Flexible Sentencing and the Violent Crime Control Act of 1994" from Federal Sentencing Reporter, Vol. 7, No. 3, November/December 1994 at pages 128-131. Kopel is cited at note 1.
Justice William Pryor previously served as Attorney General for the State of Alabama. As Attorney General, he contributed the following jacket quote for Kopel's book Antitrust after Microsoft: "Against the backdrop of the Microsoft case and the volatile marketplace in the information-technology age, David Kopel brilliantly and concisely makes the case for putting consumers first by burying antitrust doctrines of monopoly power, tying arrangements, and predatory pricing.
Reason, December 1999
David Kopel's article aptly demonstrates his keen analytical abilities and thorough research. Based upon the reasoning used in Rice v. Paladin, a survivor of guerrilla warfare could sue Leon Uris for writing Trinity or Exodus because they extol the excitement and effectiveness of guerrilla tactics against an established government with consequent loss of innocent lives. If one could obtain jurisdiction on the authors or editors of the Bible, I can only hazard a guess as to how many miscreants would attempt to justify their criminal behavior through their fractured readings of the Good Book.
The missing ingredient from these ridiculous decisions is the independent intervening cause that breaks the chain of circumstances leading from a book to action: the mind and judgment of the reader. The wisdom of the ages insists that responsibility for that judgment or lack thereof rests with the reader. Aside from the other dangers of censorship and thought control about which Kopel writes so well, the very essence of a civilized society, based upon the requirement that individuals are responsible for their own acts, is being desiccated by this sort of mindless pandering.
John L. Kane Jr.
U.S. District Court
Jacket text for Kopel's book Guns: Who Should Have Them? "Whether you're an advocate or an opponent of gun control, this engaging, thoroughly-research book presents innovative solutions to one of America's pressing social problems." Richard Neeley, retired Chief Justice, Supreme Court of West Virginia.
Kopel has been cited in 690 law review articles, and in 305 different law journals. He has been cited by the main law journal at all of the 50 top law schools. (Based on U.S. News & World Report ranking; citations counted on 8/18/2012).
Below is a list of law reviews where Kopel has have been cited. It includes all journals in Westlaw’s JLR-PRO database. This includes some faculty-edited law journals (such as the Journal on Law and Economics), and also several practitioners journals which produce footnoted, scholarly articles, but which are not published by law schools. In the list below, most journals are cited in the simplest format (e.g., “Kentucky” rather than “University of Kentucky Law Review.”)
Administrative Law Review, Akron, Alabama, Albany L.J. of Science & Technology, American, American Bankruptcy L.J., American Criminal L. Rev., American J. of Criminal L. (from Univ. of Texas), American J. of Gender, Social Policy & the Law, American J. of Law & Medicine, American J. of Legal History, American U. Intl. L. Rev., Annual Survey of American Law, Annals of Health Law, Annual Survey of Int'l & Comp. L., Army Lawyer, Arizona, Arizona J. of International and Comparative L., Arizona State, Army Lawyer.
Baltimore, Barry, Boston College, Boston College Environmental Affairs, Boston College International and Comparative Law Review, Boston College Third World Law, Boston Univ., Boston Univ. Public Interest Law Journal, Brooklyn, Brooklyn Journal of International Law, Buffalo, Buffalo Human Rights, BYU, BYU Education. & L.J., BYU J. Public Law.
California (Berkeley), Campbell, Capital, Cardozo, Cardozo Arts and Entertainment, Cardozo J. of Conflict Resolution, Cardozo J. of L. & Gender, Case Western, Case Western Reserve Journal of International Law, Catholic, Cato Supreme Court Rev., Champion (National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers), Chapman, Chicago, Chicago-Kent, Chicago-Kent Journal of International and Comparative Law, Cincinnati, Cleveland State, Colorado, Colorado Lawyer (Colorado Bar Association), Columbia, Columbia J. Envtl. L., Columbia J. of Gender & Law, Columbia J. of Transnational L., Connecticut, Constitutional Commentary (faculty-edited, from Univ. of Minn.), Cornell, Cornell J.L. & Pub. Pol'y, Creighton, Creighton Int'l & Comp. L.J., Cumberland.
Davis (Univ. of Cal.), Davis J. International L. & Pol., Dayton, Defense Counsel Journal, Denver, Denver J. of Intl. Law & Pol., DePaul Law Review, DePaul-LCA Journal of Art and Entertainment L., Detroit-Mercy, District of Columbia Law Review, Drexel, Duke, Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar, Duquesne.
Ecology L.Q., Education L. Rep., Emory, Environmental & Energy Law & Policy, Environmental Law.
Federal Lawyer, Florida, Florida A&M, Florida Coastal L. Rev., Florida J. of Law & Public Policy, Florida State, Fordham, Fordham Intellectual Property Media & Entertainment L.J., Fordham International L.J., Fordham Urban LJ.
George Mason, George Mason U. Civil Rights L.J., George Washington, Georgetown, Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics, Georgia, Georgia J. of Intl. & Comp. L., Golden Gate U. Envtl. L.J., Gonzaga.
Hamline, Hamline J. of Law & Pub. Pol.; Harvard, Harvard BlackLetter L.J., Harvard J. of Law & Gender, Harvard Law & Policy Rev., Harvard J. of Law & Public Pol., Harvard J. on Legislation, Hastings, Hastings Business L.J., Hastings Constitutional L.Q., Hawaii, Health Matrix: Journal of Law-Medicine, Houston, Houston J. of Health L. & Policy, Howard.
Idaho, Illinois, Illinois Bar J., ILSA Journal of International and Comparative Law, Indiana, Indiana Health L. Rev., Indiana J. of Global Legal Studies, International Rev. of Law and Economics, Iowa, IUS Gentium.
John Marshall Journal of Computer & Information Law. Journal of Affordable Housing & Community Development L., Journal of Air Law & Commerce, Journal of Animal Law (Michigan State), Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (from Northwestern), Journal of Food L. & Policy (Arkansas), Journal of Gender, Race & Justice (Iowa), Journal of High Technology Law, Journal of the Institute of Justice and International Studies, Journal of Law & Economics (faculty-edited, from U. of Chicago), Journal of Law, Economics & Policy, Journal of Law and Education, Journal of Law & Policy, Journal of Law & Religion, Journal of Legal Education, Journal of the Legal Profession, Journal Legal Med., Journal of Legal Studies, Journal of Maritime Law and Commerce, Journal of Technology Law & Policy.
Kansas, Kansas J. of Law & Public Policy, Kentucky.
Law & Contemporary Problems, Law & Ethics of Human Rights, Law & History, Law & Society, Law Library J., Lewis & Clark, Lincoln, Loyola, Loyola Consumer L.Rev., Loyola of Los Angeles, Loyola Univ. of Chicago., Loyola University Chicago International Law Review.
Maine, Marquette, Marquette Sports Law, Maryland, Maryland L.J. Race, Religion, Gender & Class, McGeorge, Medicine & Law, Memphis, Mercer, Miami, Miami International & Comparative, Michigan, Michigan J. Gender & L., Michigan J. of Law Reform, Michigan State, Midwest, Military L. Rev., Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana.
New England J. on Civil & Criminal Confinement, New England L. Rev., New Mexico, Nevada, New York International L. Rev., New York Law Sch. J. of Human Rights, New York L.S., New York L.S. J. of Intl. & Comp. L., Nexus, North Carolina, North Carolina Central, Northern Kentucky, NYU, NYU J. of L. & Liberty, NYU Journal of Legislation and Public Policy, Northern Illinois, Northwestern, Northwestern J. of Law & Social Policy, Notre Dame, Nova.
Ohio State, Oklahoma City Univ., Oklahoma, Oregon.
Pace, Penn State, Pennsylvania, Pennsylvania J. of Constitutional Law, Penn State; Pepperdine, Phoenix, Preview of U.S. Sup. Ct. Cases, Public Law, Puget Sound.
Review of Litigation, Richmond, Roger Williams, Rutgers L.J., Rutgers J. of L. & Public Policy, Rutgers L. Rev., Rutgers Race & the Law Rev.
San Diego, San Francisco, Seattle, Santa Clara, Seattle, Seattle J. for Social Justice, Seton Hall, Seton Hall Constitutional L.J., Seton Hall J. Sports & Entertainment L., Seton Hall Legislative J., South Carolina, South Dakota, South Texas, Southern California, Southern Cal. Interdisciplinary L.J.; Southern Illinois, Southern U. L.R., Southwestern, St. John’s, St. John’s Journal of Legal Commentary, St. Louis U. Public Law Review, St. Mary's, St. Thomas, Stanford, Stanford J. Int'l L., Stanford L & Policy; Stanford Technology, Suffolk, Syracuse.
Temple, Tennessee, Texas, Texas J. on Civil Liberties & Civil Rights, Texas Rev. of Law & Politics, Texas Tech, Texas Wesleyan, The Crit, Theoretical Inquiries, Thomas M. Cooley, Thomas M. Cooley J. of Practical and Clinical L., Thomas Jefferson, Toledo, Toronto, Touro International L.Rev., Tulane, Tulsa.
UCLA, UCLA J. of International Law & Foreign Affairs, UCLA Entertainment L. Rev., UMKC, Utah.
Valparaiso, Vanderbilt, Vanderbilt J. of Transnational L., Vermont, Villanova, Virginia, Virginia J. of Social Policy & the Law, Virginia Tax Rev.
Wake Forest, Washington U., Washington U. J. of Law & Policy, Washington & Lee, Washington and Lee Journal of Civil Rights and Social Justice, West Virginia, Western New England L.Rev., Whittier, Widener, William & Mary, William & Mary Bill of Rights J., William Mitchell L.Rev., Wisconsin, Women's Rights Law Reporter
Yale, Yale J. of International Law, Yale J. of Law & the Humanities, Yale Law & Policy.
American Behavioral Scientist, The American Review of Public Administration, The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, Communications and the Law, Forum for Applied Research and Public Policy, The Future of Children, Human Security Journal/Revue de Sécurité Humaine, Journal of Public Health Policy, Journal of Peace Research, Medical Sentinel, Men and Masculinities, Public Administration Review, Social Theory and Practice, Sociological Review, Theological Studies.