Attorneys Fee Award of $1,132,182 in Second Amendment Case Against District of Columbia Handgun Ban

On December 29, six attorneys who worked on the lawsuit Heller v District of Columbia were awarded a total of $1,132,182 in attorneys fees. Heller v D.C. was not an election law case. This post is nevertheless being made because it illustrates the power of the 1976 federal law that awards attorneys’ fees to attorneys who win constitutional civil rights cases. Election law cases are part of civil rights. Here is the District Court’s order, explaining how the amount was calculated.

Heller v D.C. challenged the District’s total ban on handguns. Heller won the case in the U.S. Supreme Court in 2008. Heller’s three main attorneys received these amounts: Alan Gura $662,424; Clark Neily $294,084; Robert Levy $101,020. Three other attorneys for Heller received smaller amounts.

Heller’s attorneys received compensation for the hours they spent researching the Ninth Amendment, even though they did not win the case on Ninth Amendment grounds. Instead, they won on Second Amendment grounds. Thanks to How Appealing for the link.


Comments

Attorneys Fee Award of $1,132,182 in Second Amendment Case Against District of Columbia Handgun Ban — 5 Comments

  1. Richard,

    Thanks for the post.

    If local or state governments can be held financially accountable for the non-constitutional actions of their executives, legislatures and employees then all citizens, tax payers and beneficiaries will be more likely to fire(not re-elect) the responsible individuals. The elected officials might after a few of them get dumped.. they might get the message.

  2. Its a deterrent against enacting and acting upon unconstitutional laws. I hope the same applies when Obama-care is overturned. O how I hope this would chill Congressmen that say things like “most of the laws we pass are not constitutional” (charlie ranglin’ rangle), but it doesn’t seem to be sufficient since dc keeps doing it.

  3. Pingback: DC Ordered to Pay $1M in Historic Gun Case – ABC News | Politics News Report

  4. ONLY the Congress robot party hacks are *immune* in their slanders and libels in speeches/debates in the gerrymander Congress – for historical reasons – the English Parliament versus the EVIL Brit monarchs in the 1500s-1600s

    Art. I, Sec. 6, para 1 part —
    *** and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.

    SCOTUS, as usual, has subverted such language and has allowed immunity for legislators in general, judges in particular and even many/some executive officials for their UN-constitutional acts/omissions.

    Result the TOTAL EVIL in the Fed and State regimes.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.