That's quote of the day material.
Posted on 05/08/2002 11:57:58 AM PDT by Patriotman
White House reverses stand on right to bear arms
Associated Press
Washington — Reversing decades of Justice Department policy, the Bush administration has told the Supreme Court that it believes the Constitution protects an individual's right to possess firearms.
At the same time, the administration's top Supreme Court lawyer said the case need not test that principle now.
The administration's view represents a reversal of government interpretations of the Second Amendment going back some 40 years.
"The current position of the United States ... is that the Second Amendment more broadly protects the rights of individuals, including persons who are not members of any militia or engaged in active military service or training, to possess and bear their own firearms," Solicitor-General Theodore Olson wrote in two court filings this week.
That right, however, is "subject to reasonable restrictions designed to prevent possession by unfit persons or to restrict the possession of types of firearms that are particularly suited to criminal misuse."
Mr. Olson, the administration's top Supreme Court lawyer, was reflecting the view of Attorney-General John Ashcroft that the Second Amendment confers the right to "keep and bear arms" to private citizens and not merely to the "well-regulated militia" mentioned in the amendment's text.
Mr. Ashcroft caused a stir when he expressed a similar sentiment a year ago in a letter to the National Rifle Association.
"While some have argued that the Second Amendment guarantees only a 'collective' right of the states to maintain militias, I believe the amendment's plain meaning and original intent prove otherwise," Mr. Ashcroft wrote.
Critics accused him of kowtowing to the gun lobby and of undermining federal prosecutors by endorsing a legal view 180 degrees away from what has been official Justice Department policy through four Democratic and five Republican administrations.
At the time that Mr. Ashcroft wrote the letter, it was unclear whether he was expressing his personal view or stating a new policy position for the government. That question was mostly answered last November, when he sent a letter to federal prosecutors praising an appellate court's decision that found "the Second Amendment does protect individual rights" but noting that those rights could be subject to "limited, narrowly tailored specific exceptions."
That opinion by the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals went on to reject arguments from Texas physician Timothy Emerson that a 1994 federal gun law was unconstitutional. The law was intended to deny guns to people under judicial restraining orders.
"In my view, the Emerson opinion, and the balance it strikes, generally reflect the correct understanding of the Second Amendment," Mr. Ashcroft told prosecutors.
Mr. Emerson appealed to the Supreme Court, putting the Justice Department in an awkward position. Although the government won its case in the lower court using the old interpretation of the Second Amendment, Mr. Ashcroft had switched gears by the time the case reached the high court.
Mr. Olson's court filing on Monday urged the Supreme Court not to get involved and acknowledged the policy change in a lengthy footnote. Mr. Olson also attached Mr. Ashcroft's letter to prosecutors.
Mr. Olson made the same notation in a separate case involving a man convicted of owning two machine guns in violation of federal law. In that case, the government also won a lower-court decision endorsing a federal gun-control law.
The Justice Department issued a statement Tuesday night saying its latest comments reflect the Attorney-General's position in the November letter to prosecutors.
"This action is proof positive that the worst fears about Attorney-General Ashcroft have come true: His extreme ideology on guns has now become government policy," said Michael Barnes, president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which promotes gun control.
Mr. Barnes noted that other federal appeals courts and the Supreme Court have not found the same protection for individual gun ownership that the 5th Circuit asserted in the Emerson case.
The Supreme Court last ruled on the scope of the Second Amendment in 1939, when it said the clause protects only those rights that have "some reasonable relationship to the preservation of efficiency of a well-regulated militia."
I seem to recall that, but regardless, that's what I expect he'll do unless he faces a *very real* threat of losing the election if he does it.
So, we need to set about producing such a threat.
On the one hand, Ashcroft's pronouncements re. RKBA are a good opening salvo, and a useful way to soften up the opposition before hammering them with actual legislation. On the other hand, does this administration intend any actual legislation (or relief from existing legislation), or are pronouncements and opinions all we'll see from them?
Thus far, as far as action vs. words goes vis-a-vis RKBA, all we've seen them do is refuse to let commercial pilots defend us from terrorists...
Of course not. I read this thread just to see if there were one unqualified positive comment from the regular bashers around here.
It didn't happen, of course. That would mean they'd have to be happy about something, and they live to be mad.....especially at Bush.
This is good news. Bush has done what Reagan did not.
I still can't bear to watch him on tv, afraid I might see him hug another terrorist, but this week he's done good.
Dang..if thats "liberal" of him.. then I hope he continues the trend!!!
As the owners of guns and obviously advocates for the right to bear arms.. We applaud this.
That's quote of the day material.
But dammit, this Farm Bill is a total outrage. Bush should be trying to cut back the govt. We need to put more pressure on him.
Braindead, why don't you read the friggin article....it wasn't me that reported what Olson did! And if it holds up and the SC don't act on it, then the Bush administration deserves nothing but scorn! You don't like that....its called tough s**t, buster! At least have the decency to realize it wasn't me that wrote the damn arguments!
For the record, Braindead.....the article said how many Demo administrations and how many Republican administrations have let this slide.....it ain't my fault the friggin President's administration is called the Bush Administration and if they let this issue slide they would become the sixth, 6th!!
Take a clue, Birdbrain.....YOU BROUGHT UP REAGAN......have you realized yet the Republicans are no different than the Democrats on this issue? Matter of fact, 4 vs 5 [6] would appear to make the Republicans worse for anyone who believes in the right to keep and bear arms!! Duh!!
Well, Tonk, this sounds like pretty good news, FRiend! :O)
Did ya see this?.........
"This action is proof positive that the worst fears about Attorney-General Ashcroft have
come true: His extreme ideology on guns has now become government policy," said Michael
Barnes, president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which promotes gun control.
Looks like we got 'em on the run! LOL!
Thanks for the ping, FRiend! :O)
Excerpt:
Reversing decades of Justice Department policy, the Bush administration has told the
Supreme Court that it believes the Constitution protects an individual's right to possess firearms............
"This action is proof positive that the worst fears about Attorney-General Ashcroft have
come true: His extreme ideology on guns has now become government policy," said Michael
Barnes, president of the Brady Center to Prevent Gun Violence, which promotes gun control.
Please let me know if you want ON or OFF my ping list!. . .don't be shy.
Here is yet another example of Bubba Bush and Janet Ashcroft being too cute for words. They are trying to act like Constiutional thinkers,while at the same time telling the Supreme Court to not take a case that would overturn federal gun laws. They are terrified the whole un-Constitutional gun control house of cards will come tumbling down over their ears.
When will these idiots learn that all talking out both sides of your mouth accomplishes is getting both sides mad at you. The gun-control feaks are having fainting spells over Ashcroft's pose,while anybody oppossed to gun-control who thinks about this for a minute will realize what Ashcroft and Bubba-2 are really doing is selling us down the river.
Paranoia doesn't look good on you!
Your just gun shy from the Clinton administration!!! (pun intended)
Stop and think for a minute about what he has REALLY done,not what spin says he has done. He is doing his best to torpedo a case that would most likely serve as a basis for overturning ALL federal gun-control laws. Janet Ashcroft's "letter of intent" isn't binding in any way,and means less than nothing to any future AG who replaces him. On the other hand,a modern Supreme Court ruling that clearly states the federal government does NOT have a legal right to restrict the ownership or possession of arms by citizens would be grounds to overturn GCA-68,the Assault Weapons Ban,and every other federal gun law. The plain FACT is the federal government does NOT have the right to restrict ownership or possession of firearms by citizens in ANY way. Bubba Bush and Janet Ashcroft are working hard to try and make sure this never happens.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.