[url]http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=32474[/url]
A noted libertarian think tank has asked a federal
court to bar the National Rifle Association from
participating in a lawsuit challenging Washington,
D.C.'s total ban on handguns.
A pair of scholars from the CATO Institute filed suit
in federal court in Washington, D.C. earlier this year
on behalf of six plaintiffs who are challenging the
constitutionality of the District's ban on handguns.
Last month, NRA attorneys Stephen Halbrook and
Richard Gardiner filed a motion to have the court
consolidate CATO's suit and a separate but similar
suit filed by the NRA. (Note: You must have Adobe
Acrobat to open this file).
The request has drawn the ire of CATO attorneys
Alan Gura and Robert Levy, however, leading them
to file a motion with the court May 1 to have NRA's
request denied.
"The motion to consolidate should be denied because
it is untimely, ill-conceived and inappropriate," the
attorneys wrote.
The NRA joined plaintiffs Sandra Seegars, Gardine
Hailes, Absalom Jordan Jr., Carmela Brown and
Robert Hemphill April 4; CATO lawyers filed their
suit on behalf of these five plaintiffs and "lead
plaintiff" Shelly Parker Feb. 10.
But, CATO attorneys said, "allowing the Seegars
plaintiffs to join this litigation would substantially and
unnecessarily complicate what is presently a
straightforward single-issue case.
"By adding a variety of extraneous claims to a case
that is nearly ready for summary disposition, the
Seegars plaintiffs would impede this court in resolving
the narrow issue presented in the Parker litigation
and substantially prejudice the Parker plaintiffs by
delaying resolution of their claim," CATO attorneys
claim.
"The Seegars plaintiffs' attempt to participate in this
case is motivated not by a bona fide desire to
adjudicate their claims, but by the improper strategic
goals of their sponsor, the National Rifle Association,"
said the think tank's legal team.
More..............