March 8, 2003


Donald Bird, pursuing the effort to clarify his right as an individual to possess arms, has entered a Petition for Writ of Certiorari before the United States Supreme Court in order to override the devious decision of the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco.  An accurate Constitutional pleading, the proper approach and unassailable defense of an individual’s right to arms; one which is capable of thwarting all attacks against the people’s right to keep and bear arms, is now before the court.  Bird has infused the common sense reasoning found in the dissertation by the Hanford, California Second Amendment Committee as the basis for his Petition for Writ of Certiorari.


A Petition for Writ of Certiorari is a possible way to stand against the devious decisions and actions of all those who have conspired to divest the people of their most precious right – the right to arms. The general purpose of a Petition for Writ of Certiorari is to engage the assistance of a superior court to order an inferior court to reconsider its own previous decision.


In Donald Bird’s particular case, he is trying to enlist the assistance of the United States Supreme Court to order the inferior 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco to reconsider its previous    “No” decision in which it supported the untruthful statements of Gray Davis, Governor of the State of California, and William Lockyer, the State Attorney-general, who have put forth the following erroneous view:


“The Constitution does not provide a private right to bear arms.  That is, the Second Amendment secures to the states the right to maintain an armed a result, the Second Amendment does not protect the possession of a weapon of a private citizen”.


Davis and Lockyer had entered a counter suit against Bird’s original suit by using the above misconception of the Second Amendment.  The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco has so far upheld the erroneous view of Davis and Lockyer, thus causing Bird’s first efforts to be thwarted.


Bird then filed the Petition for Writ of Certiorari adding the additional Second Amendment Committee research to support his case, and it promises to overrule the false premise upon which Davis and Lockyer’s counter suit rests.  The additional research included in the Petition for Writ of Certiorari should cause the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to render a proper decision regarding an individual’s right to arms.


Petitioning the Supreme Court doesn’t guarantee that this higher Court will accept any particular case.  Whether or not the Supreme Court chooses to do its duty and accept Bird’s case, and bring relief to the people against the abuses of the right to arms by the lower court, is yet to be seen.


Nevertheless, this effort for redress must be tried through these Constitutional channels, and if Bird’s effort fails, it will be established that the people did not fail to avail themselves of the normal procedures, proper reasoning, or recourses.


Bird has worked diligently for two years as his own attorney in this effort, fully determined to overcome all obstacles, and clarify that he does have an inherent individual right to arms, despite the untruthful statements he has found emanating from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, the Governor of the State of California, the State Attorney-general, as well as many other anti-gun state and federal legislators. 




Bird has properly filed the necessary papers with added research to engender the support of the highest court in the land hoping to put an end to the deception.  Thus, his recent Petition for Writ of Certiorari has been mailed to the court justices in Washington, D.C.  It is a landmark case the like of which has never before been heard.  The United States Supreme Court cannot go against the verifiable constitutionality of the research.   


The Supreme Court has the power to order the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to produce the certified record of Bird’s case, as was recorded under their jurisdiction, and to force a review of the decision of the case.  The procedure to be followed at the Supreme Court is:



1.      First, the Writ will be viewed by the court clerk to verify that the rules of the court have been met.  If accepted, a docket number is assigned, which means that his case will be officially “in”.  As of this date, a docket number has not yet been assigned.  Next, the justices will read and review his case with the added research.  They will then make a determination as to whether their court will accept the case or reject it.  The Supreme Court has the discretion to decline any support.  It all hangs on the justices who first review the Petition for Writ of Certiorari with the added research.


2.      If the Supreme Court accepts Bird’s case, they will possibly order the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to re-open and review the case in light of the new research.  The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals could refuse the order to reconsider the case, and in that event, the case goes back to the Supreme Court, which may take it under their own consideration.  It is unknown what the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals would do, but it will be an exciting learning experience for all of us Patriots.


3.      If the Supreme Court hears the case, and if they rule against Bird, he has the option to file a “Petition for a Re-hearing” which must be done within 25 days after the ruling, for a $200.00 filing fee.  He may then challenge the United States Supreme Court and their reasoning under which they chose to reject the indisputable reasoning contained in Bird’s Writ.


Bird intends to force a constitutional answer from one court or the other.  Nothing ventured is nothing gained.  A full copy of his important Petition for Writ of Certiorari is included here for your review.  The Second Amendment Committee’s full dissertation is located here on this web site under the category entitled: “Patrick Henry – the Immortal Voice for Liberty” by the title:  “Public Officials Have No Power to Pass Anti-gun Laws”.


As events occur, all new action in Bird’s case will be posted on this web site.  Keep in touch, if you would like to drop Don Bird a line of encouragement, his address is:


Don Bird, P.O. Box 5313, Corning, California 96021.



                                                                        Second Amendment Committee


Bernadine Smith, National Director