| WASHINGTON
- May 23 - In a May 17 letter to the National Rifle Association, Attorney General John Ashcroft stated that his Justice Department believes
that the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees an
individual right to own firearms -- a view that runs contrary to
federal court decisions spanning nearly 120 years and reverses the stance of the previous administration.
The change in position is troubling not only because it ignores
legal precedent, but because it could undermine the promise
Ashcroft made to the American people during his confirmation
hearings to fully enforce the nation's gun laws. How can our
Attorney General enforce laws that he and his Justice Department
believe violate the Constitution of the United States?
The meaning and intent of the Second Amendment is clear:
-- The U.S. Supreme Court case U.S. v. Miller (1939) ruled that
the Second Amendment protects a state's right to maintain a
well-regulated militia rather than an individual's right to possess
a firearm. The Supreme Court has declined to hear another Second
Amendment case since that ruling.
-- The courts have let stand gun control laws including the
Brady Law, and even handgun bans in several U.S. cities.
-- Former Supreme Court Chief Justice Warren Burger vigorously
argued that the Second Amendment referred to a collective state
right, and characterized attempts by those who would distort the
meaning of the Second Amendment as "fraud."
While Ashcroft's personal interpretation of the Second Amendment
is not surprising (he espoused the same view as Governor, and later
Senator from the state of Missouri), his view now takes on added
significance in his role as Attorney General.
Coalition to Stop Gun Violence President Michael K. Beard took
issue with Ashcroft's irresponsible misinterpretation of the Second
Amendment, and called on the Justice Department to renew its
commitment to enforcing established law: "Attorney General Ashcroft swore to uphold and enforce the law during his
confirmation hearings. For the Justice Department to take a
position so contrary to the established meaning of the Second
Amendment sheds a wary light on where Mr. Ashcroft's true
commitments lie.
"The intent and meaning of the Second Amendment is clear. In
ruling after ruling, the federal courts, including the Supreme
Court, have ruled that the Second Amendment refers to the
collective right of states to maintain militias, and not an
individual right to own a firearm."
###
|
