In a message dated 2/9/04 4:27:37 PM Central Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
<< What is the group's consensus whether this presents issues regarding executive versus judicial branch, and full faith and credit issues due to the judicial endorsement? >> I've often thought this issue would result in an excellent argument under the privileges and immunities clause, but not FF&C, for various reasons, including those which Gene points out. A similar argument could be made for the right to practice law or medicine in any state once admitted in one state. What privileges and immunities arguments have been successful in other states, versus which have not, like law and medicine? An interesting angle on the FF&C argument could be made by those who have gone to court to have permits issued. In most states, if an applicant is denied, the recourse is to the state trial court. In these states, if an otherwise qualified applicant is denied by the issuing authority, the court can order a permit to be issued. Would this court order be entitled to FF&C in another state? Granted, this subset of all applicants is likely small, perhaps statistically insignificant. Also, I suspect a strong chance of "bad facts" on the part of the applicant that would lead to problematic litigation: e.g., juvenile offenses, prior mental health history, strange but not illegal behavior, etc. Regards, Scott Hattrup _______________________________________________ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof
