Source: http://keepandbeararms.com/Bach/overview.asp
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 00:48:04+00:00

Document:
Bach v. Pataki was filed on November 29, 2002. It argues for the individual right of the people to keep and bear arms under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments and brings additional issues up for review not addressed in the Silveira v. Lockyer lawsuit -- including the issue of interstate travel while exercising the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
You can see all pleadings, from the original complaint to present, on the Status Page. A Petition for Certiorari is already nearly complete and will be filed with the United States Supreme Court very soon.
Bach v. Pataki was filed by Mr. David Bach of Virginia. Mr. Bach travels to New York -- with his wife and children, to visit his parents -- and wishes to carry a firearm for self-defensive purposes in his travels. New York prohibits him from doing so and would apparently rather leave him defenseless against their infamous robbers and killers than allow him to protect his loved ones and provide them safe passage. This is an unacceptable violation of Mr. Bach's Second Amendment rights.
I. Whether the New York statutory policy of prosecuting out-of-State citizens who carry protective arms when traveling into the State, violates the privileges and (or) immunities clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment and Article IV, �2, as well as the Equal Protection clause of the Fourteenth?
II. Whether the Second, and Fourteenth Amendments, and Article IV, �2, protect the rights of individual citizens to keep and bear arms for family and personal defense while traveling interstate, without the threat of State confiscation or prosecution?
A. Whether the right to keep and bear arms is protected by Article IV, �2, and should be incorporated into the Fourteenth Amendment, applied to the States, and then Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252 (1886), and United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876), overruled?
B. Whether the Second Amendment should be held to be part of the Fourteenth Amendment privileges or immunities of individual citizens, and the Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. (16 Wall.) 36 (1873), limited or overruled?
C. Whether United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939), decided with no argument or appellate counsel for Miller, should be limited or overruled, and a fundamental individual right of family and personal defense recognized by this Court under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments?
III. Whether a heightened standard of review should be applied to these state statutes that infringe fundamental rights protected by the Second Amendment, and incorporated into the Fourteenth?
Those will be the Questions for the Justice to hear and decide, should this case be granted a Supreme Court hearing. It's possible the questions may be slightly reworded, but not substantively so -- and we will publish the Cert Petition once it is filed.
This includes a synopsis of the case, the objectives of the case, statements from the originator of the case and our relationship with him, and our commitment to the case.
This includes each filing in the case to date and what comes next.
This includes links to media reports about Bach v. Pataki.
The official home page for Bach v. Pataki is http://KeepAndBearArms.com/Bach. That home page is permanent and will remain in place until we are victorious or until we are denied our rightful day in court to legitimately address our grievances.

References: v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.