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

« Does gun control contribute to militarization of police? | Main | NRA Convention »

Elena Kagan's nonreaction to Heller

Posted by David Hardy · 12 May 2010 10:17 AM

The NY Times has her answers to questions posed when she was nominated for SG.

6 Comments | Leave a comment

Letalis Maximus, Esq. | May 12, 2010 10:30 AM | Reply

Well. Okay then.

Cory | May 12, 2010 1:04 PM | Reply

I think her answers on Heller were pretty clear.


Answer: The Supreme Court held in District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S.Ct. 2783 (2008), that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms. The Court granted this right the same status as other individual rights guaranteed by the Constitution, such as those protected in the First Amendment. Like other nominees to the Solicitor General position, I have refrained from providing my personal opinions of constitutional law (except in areas where I previously have stated opinions), both because those opinions will play no part in my official decisions and because such statements of opinion might be used to undermine the interests of the United States in litigation. I can say, however, that I understand the Solicitor General’s obligations to include deep respect for Supreme Court precedents like Heller and for the principle of stare decisis generally. There is no question, after Heller, that the Second Amendment guarantees Americans “the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation.”

If you are confirmed, will you commit to protect an individual’s right to possess a firearm? Answer: If I am confirmed, I will commit to show Heller and the principles articulated in it the full measure of respect that is due to all constitutional decisions of the Court. Only highly unusual circumstances can justify the Solicitor General’s office in asking the Court to reconsider a decision, especially one as thoroughly considered as Heller. Once again, there is no question, after Heller, that the Second Amendment guarantees individuals the right to keep and bear arms and that this right, like others in the Constitution, provides strong although not unlimited protection against governmental regulation.

Answer: The Supreme Court held in District of Columbia v. Heller, 128 S.Ct. 2783 (2008), that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms. In light of this right, the Court invalidated a ban on handgun possession in the home. At the same time, the Court stated that “some measures regulating” firearms would comport with this constitutional right. Essentially, the Court made clear that the Second Amendment right to bear arms should be treated like any other constitutional right – the Court, for example, offered an analogy to the First Amendment – providing strong but not unlimited protection. As I indicated at my confirmation hearing, my concept of the Solicitor General’s role includes respect for Supreme Court precedents such as Heller and for the principle of stare decisis generally.

Jim D. | May 12, 2010 7:51 PM | Reply

She won't vote on MacDonald. How would she feel about invalidating Slaughter-House? Or does she thing gerrymandering the P&I clause out of the Constitution was a good thing?

If it's OK, how would she feel about torturing the definition of "reasonable regulation" to the same extent that Kelo did with "property rights"?

And does she really think Heller upheld the "bear" part of "keep and bear" or just the the "keep" part?

elgee | May 13, 2010 7:36 AM | Reply

Honestly, I think this woman is as good as we'll get from a liberal president.

Jim | May 13, 2010 12:56 PM | Reply

As good as we'll get? We know nothing about her, good or bad.

doug in colorado | May 14, 2010 12:53 PM | Reply

Too many times it's a case of the nominee saying what they think will get them approved, and once they're appointed for life they do as they please...too bad the founders didn't provide for impeachment of judges who disregard their oath to uphold the constitution, by vote of the Sovereign People of the United States, by some means like the electoral college.

Leave a comment