« Georgia case on airports | Main | Cross petition for cert. in Parker/Heller denied »
How will ACLU react to Heller?
It puts them in quite a dilemma. Their past supposed neutrality on the 2A was premised on their position that Miller settled that it wasn't an individual right, so they didn't have to consider it one. Heller takes care of that nicely. So what are they to do? Some thoughts at Concurring Opinions. (Via Instapundit, who notes that this will bring to a head their tension between being a civil liberties group and being a limosine/left political group). I once heard speculation that there was another factor: major foundation funding that might dry up if they acknowledged the 2A.
6 Comments | Leave a comment
The ACLU determined an official policy regarding the Second Amendment at a meeting in New York City in the mid to late 1990s as I recall. I was invited to participate in that meeting by Nadine Strossen. There may have been other such meetings since then, but as far as I know, the ACLU's policy has not changed since then, and their latest policy was probably decided at that meeting. The only possible reason why I would have been invited to such a meeting was my publication of The Origin of the Second Amendment in 1991.
Unfortunately in hindsight, I decided not to take up the ACLU's invitation for a number of reasons, one of which was a lack of interest in going to NYC. Considering the policy adopted by the ACLU and their position and explanations since then, I think my decision was the correct one for that period. The ACLU's position on the Second Amendment has been exceedingly biased and directly contrary to historical facts AND the actual decision in Miller. The possibility that I could have influenced those who came up with their official policy is negligible.
However, times they are a changin'. I think the ACLU might be amenable today regarding getting their Second Amendment act back on a Bill of Rights track. We shall see. It would be nice if they could hold such a meeting in a place like Louisville, KY, so they could actually experience people all around them packing heat and not wantonly killing each other, just to prove a point. If the opportunity ever came up again to assist the ACLU in their understanding of the Second Amendment, I would not decline assisting them this time.
We should all remember that not all ACLU members supported the ACLU's national policy. I met a distinguished older California gentleman and ACLU member in 1984 in Phoenix who looked like Colonel Sanders but was much taller and thinner. Can't quite remember his name. He vehemently opposed the ACLU's Second Amendment stance. He was one of the first people to whom I described my project to collect and publish all the Founding Era source documents relating to the Second Amendment. I am sure there have been many other ACLU members who disagreed with their Second Amendment stance over the years in addition to him.
IIRC ACLU Policy Statement #47, aka "the people doesn't mean what it means in the 1st and 4th Amendments", was first articulated or extended or manipulated...er...anyway, it dates to the early 1980's. Any conference in the 1990's, after Waco, would probably have been just some window dressing...
Any idea which foundation funding may dry up?
Could it be the Joyce Foundation? That same foundation which has pumped millions to the exremist anti-gun organization, the Violence Policy Center?
"the Court placed a constitutional limit on gun control legislation that had not existed prior to its decision in Heller."
oh. perhaps the ACLU is referring to where scalia put "really, really" in front of "shall not be infringed."
i guess i'll have to go look at that again.