Legalities
Life, Politics and the Law From ABC News Correspondent Jan Crawford Greenburg
Jan Crawford Greenburg is a correspondent for ABC News' bureau in Washington DC. She covers politics, the Supreme Court and provides legal analysis for ABC News. She is a graduate of the University of Chicago's law school and is a member of the New York bar.
RECENT POSTS
MONTHLY ARCHIVES
« Previous | Main | Next »
More Ammo for Gun Rights
February 07, 2008 6:18 PM
Momentum is building for gun rights supporters in next month’s big 2nd Amendment case, with a bipartisan majority in the Senate and House filing an amicus brief in the Supreme Court tomorrow arguing that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual’s right to own a gun.
Fifty five senators and 250 representatives have signed the amicus brief—believed to be the most members of Congress to join together on a brief in modern history, said Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison, the Texas Republican who helped spearhead the effort.
"A majority of both houses of Congress have signed our brief in support of the respondent who simply wishes to exercise his constitutional right to protect himself," Hutchison said. "In a situation like this, we feel it is important for members of the legislative branch to give our opinion on the legislative history and its relevance."
Hutchison and Montana Sen. Jon Tester, a Democrat, talked about the case—and why they think the brief is significant—in a forum today at the Heritage Foundation. Both discussed the robust support for gun rights in their respective states—Hutchison joked that gun control in Texas “means you use both hands”--but said the case was important because of the message it could send if the court strikes down the DC handgun ban.
“It will say to any city that is enacting gun control laws that it is a fundamental right and you can not go beyond a certain point,” Hutchison said.
The brief, written by Virginia attorney Stephen Halbrook, traces the history of federal gun laws and efforts to protect gun rights. It also urges the Court to adopt the D.C. Circuit’s strict standard for reviewing whether regulations are unconstitutional.
The Bush Administration enraged gun rights supporters last month when it filed a brief urging the Court to take a less strict approach than that of the D.C. Circuit, in an opinion by Judge Laurence Silberman. The congressional brief embraces Silberman’s approach, which it says is "limited" and would not undermine federal gun laws--including machine gun laws and regulations on licensing and background checks.
“The lower court’s categorical approach in holding a prohibition on handguns to be unconstitutional per se was correct,” the brief argues.
But the congressional brief says even under the standard proposed by the Bush Administration, the DC handgun ban clearly was unreasonable on its face and unconstitutional.
Alan Gura, the attorney challenging the handgun ban, also said he expects a majority of the states to file amicus briefs supporting the individual rights interpretation.
February 7, 2008 | Permalink | User Comments (21)
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
"Beware of the politician that fears your gun". Is it just me or does it seem like every time the country is in deep Stuff, a group of politicians wants to promote gun control. Is this a "Look at this, not that" kind of situation? Waste resources and energy but dont fix the real problem.
My arguement against more gun control, "Do you fully trust your politicians? If your answer is no, discussion is over. If you said yes, what world do you live in? Oh yes, remember that after Katrina it took 5 days to get water 60 miles to New Orleans. 5 days!
Posted by: chas | Feb 26, 2009 9:43:56 PM
Post a comment
