Constitutional Law

NRA statement on DoJ Parker brief

It didn't take them long to react!

Statement of the National Rifle Association by Wayne LaPierre and Chris Cox on the
pending U.S. Supreme Court case:

In the coming months, the U.S. Supreme Court will consider the constitutionality
of Washington, D.C.'s ban on handgun ownership and self-defense in law-abiding
residents' homes. The Court will first address the question of whether the Second
Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, as embodied in the Bill of Rights, protects
the rights of individuals or a right of the government. If the Court agrees that
this is an individual right, they will then determine if D.C.'s self-defense
and handgun bans are constitutional.

The position of the National Rifle Association is clear. The Second Amendment protects
the fundamental, individual right of law-abiding citizens to own firearms for any
lawful purpose. Further, any law infringing this freedom, including a ban on self-defense
and handgun ownership, is unconstitutional and provides no benefit to curbing crime.
Rather, these types of restrictions only leave the law-abiding more susceptible
to criminal attack.

The U.S. Government, through its Solicitor General, has filed an amicus brief in
this case. We applaud the government's recognition that the Second Amendment
protects a fundamental, individual right that is "central to the preservation
of liberty." The brief also correctly recognizes that the D.C. statutes ban
"a commonly-used and commonly-possessed firearm in a way that has no grounding
in Framing-era practice," the Second Amendment applies to the District of Columbia,
is not restricted to service in a militia and secures the natural right of self-defense.

However, the government's position is also that a "heightened" level
of judicial scrutiny should be applied to these questions. The National Rifle Association
believes that the Court should use the highest level of scrutiny in reviewing the
D.C. gun ban. We further believe a complete ban on handgun ownership and self-defense
in one's own home does not pass ANY level of judicial scrutiny. Even the government
agrees that "the greater the scope of the prohibition and its impact on private
firearm possession, the more difficult it will be to defend under the Second Amendment."
A complete ban is the kind of infringement that is the greatest in scope. The U.S.
Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit correctly ruled that D.C.'s statutes are
unconstitutional. We strongly believe the ruling should be upheld by the U.S. Supreme
Court.

The National Rifle Association will be filing an amicus brief in this case and will
provide additional information to our members as this case moves through the legal
process.

Full post as published by Of Arms and the Law on January 12, 2008 (boomark / email).