23^rdAnnual National Firearms Law Seminar

Aside from the 2010 McDonald case, which incorporated the right to keep and bear arms through the Fourteenth Amendment and applied it to state and local governments, the Supreme Court has largely left the implementation of the right to the lower courts where litigants have had little success expanding the scope of the right.

Is this because, as Justice Thomas has charged in published dissents from denial of certiorari, that lower courts are intent on seeing the Second Amendment join the ranks of "second class rights"?

Is this reticence the product of the signals that the Court itself sent in the Heller opinion?

Is it part of the ordinary percolation that occurs when the Court issues a potentially landmark opinion of uncertain scope?

Or is it some combination of all three?

I will survey the major post-Heller Second Amendment cases and speculate why the courts have moved so cautiously.

For ten years after McDonald, the Supreme Court (with one exception, a short per curiam) declined to grant certiorari in any Second Amendment case. New York State Rifle and Pistol Ass'n v. New York, argued in December, was the first case accepted since Justice Kennedy's retirement.

This presentation will focus upon the cases now pending in the judicial "pipeline" and from which the Court might choose its next grants. Included among these are cases challenging "may issue" permit systems for firearm ownership, challenging GCA68's ban on interstate sales as applied to residents of D.C. (which has only one licensed firearms dealer), and challenging the California "handgun roster" system, which restricts dealers to selling handguns the state has certified as "safe," and one posing the issue of whether prohibited possessors can bring Second Amendment "as applied" cases.

State firearm preemption laws have been essential to preserving the right to keep and bear arms.

Recognizing this, those who wish to restrict this civil liberty have recently made widespread and sometimes coordinated attacks upon these protections.

This presentation will focus on the efforts made through the courts to undermine preemption statutes and the successful legal arguments made in defense of them.

Camden Webb will review the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, the Connecticut Supreme Court’s decision in Soto v. Bushmaster, and new developments regarding the theories of potential liability for marketing of firearms.

Many firearms industry members are seeking guidance on understanding the severity of risks if they were to be named in a lawsuit stemming from criminal misuse of products.

Attendees will learn about the underlying statute, recent case law, best practices for monitoring and policing marketing strategies, and steps which can be taken by industry members to reduce risk of potential liabilities.

The movement by counties to declare themselves Second Amendment sanctuaries has caught fire across the nation.

Although many regard it as a purely symbolic response to overreaching gun control measures, the sanctuary county movement in fact poses a real barrier to gun control efforts at both the federal and state levels. Professor Glenn Harlan Reynolds explains why.

We're hearing a lot these days about so called red flag laws.

These law are aimed squarely at using the mental health system to disarm gun owners. What are these laws all about? What laws are in effect nationally already and what laws are pending? How can we improve public policy to help people with temporary mental health issues who may also be gun owners?

This talk will explore the red flag landscape with an eye towards offering better language and better policies anchored in respect for due process, increasing public safety and respecting the rights of gun owners.

The lecture will include a review of the physiologic events in firearms related wounds (terminal ballistics).

Attention will also focus on the surgical/medical implications of such wounds.

A review of cases will expand on the realities and myths surrounding firearms and related wounds.

Such knowledge is not a part of traditional legal education but will be useful for attorneys.

Self-defense is an important topic for lawyers who practice firearms law.

You never know when you’ll receive a fateful call from a client who has had to resort to the use of force in defense of themselves, their loved ones, or their property.

In this seminar, Mr. Fulks will discuss the law of self-defense in Tennessee. Topics will include the historical development of self-defense, the constitutional and statutory bases of self-defense, key court cases, and practical considerations in developing and presenting the defense at trial.

The U.S. company that chooses to engage in the business of exporting firearms or ammunition must be prepared to enter a murky pool of statutes and agency rules and regulations that may appear non-sensical, burdensome, and difficult to navigate.

This session will provide a comprehensive overview of the regulatory landscape governing the exports of firearms and ammunition, the types of authorizations and the licensing processes, the role of foreign policy, sanctions, and agency discretion in controlling exports, and the unique impact of politics into the export licensing process.

A lawyer may not reveal information protected by the attorney-client privilege and may not counsel a client to engage in criminal conduct.

A lawyer may discuss the legal consequences of any proposed course of conduct.

How do these rules apply to advising a client in unlawful possession of a firearm based on (a) the client’s status as a felon, a person subject to a red flag order, or other legal disability or (b) the status of the firearm being unregistered, prohibited, or otherwise restricted based on its design or features?