Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« New pro-Alito blog | Main | Debate on practicality of originalism »

Another Brady Center press release on Alito

Posted by David Hardy · 7 November 2005 11:59 AM

Brady Center has issued another one. This is pretty good. They excoriate Alito for not showing more deference to Congress (i.e., not figuring it has the Constitutional power to do something -- because it wants to do something). It gets upset that Alito's dissent asks the the government come forth with "empirical evidence" that the action forbidden is actually within Congress's power over interstate commerce. And protests why should this be required, "beyond the substantial findings already made by Congress" -- nevermind that the 1986 amendment which added 18 USC 922(o) had no relevant findings attached.

It calls it an "example of judicial activism at its worst." To which the best response is Hinderaker's article below. It is NOT judicial activitism to recognize what is expressly in the Constitution.

· contemporary issues

Leave a comment