search
top

This is More Like It

NRA has published a much better statement than their initial one in their latest Grassroots Alert:

Gun owners are understandably dismayed about the brief filed by the Department of Justice.

Although the DOJ brief was filed on the same day as “friend of the court” briefs supporting the District, it does not support DC’s position but rather its own unique point of view-a view with which the NRA still disagrees.

The District is asking the Supreme Court to reverse the decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals and find that the Second Amendment does not protect a broad individual right. DOJ is supporting a different view-that the Second Amendment does protect an individual right, and that the case should go back to the lower court to apply a different standard of review. DOJ suggests applying a lower level of constitutional scrutiny than the Court of Appeals adopted. The NRA disagrees and believes the lower court’s ruling should be upheld.

NRA believes that the right to arms is a fundamental right; as with other fundamental rights, laws restricting that right deserve the highest level of scrutiny. The NRA and those seeking to overturn the gun ban believe that the scope of the Second Amendment is clear. Contrary to DOJ’s suggestion, this case is not about felons or machine guns. This case is about law-abiding people who want handguns and long guns for self-defense. The total ban on self-defense gun ownership in D.C. is so severe that it should be found unconstitutional under any level of scrutiny, and we will make that point in our “friend of the court” brief when it is filed next month.

Finally, while NRA strongly disagrees with many of the arguments in DOJ’s brief, there are a few areas of agreement. Notably, DOJ agrees that the Second Amendment protects an individual right, and that it applies to the District, even strongly hinting that under the lower “heightened scrutiny” it supports that D.C laws could be unconstitutional. This was not the position of the previous administration. In fact, Clinton administration Attorney General Janet Reno and Solicitor General Seth Waxman, along with other DOJ officials from the Clinton administration have filed their own brief in support of the District, arguing that there is no individual right at all to possess guns outside of government service.

DOJ also recognizes that the Second Amendment protects a right to self-defense, and that the right to arms was a pre-existing right protected, but not created, by the Constitution.
If you would like to express your opinion of this brief directly to DOJ, please call the Department’s Press Office at: (202) 514-2007.

Follow the link for some more background on the brief filers. This is a much better statement than the original one, and I am pleased that they had more to say on this.

5 Responses to “This is More Like It”

  1. That link doesn’t work for me–I just get a blank page.

  2. Sebastian says:

    It works now.

  3. Thanks–don’t know what you did, but it did the trick.

  4. Sebastian says:

    I linked to where I thought it was going to appear. The copy I had was in an e-mail before the page became active.

  5. Jim W says:

    Gosh, it sure would suck if Clinton was still president and we had Reno in the DOJ.

Trackbacks/Pingbacks

  1. Call me Ahab » Blog Archive » He’s right - [...] Sebastian thinks that the latest NRA statement on Heller, and the DOJ’s brief is much better than their first…
top