Commentary from The Patriot Post (see sidebar) about an earlier post subject on this blog.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit ruled Tuesday that Chicago’s handgun ban could stand because the Second Amendment is not incorporated against the states or local jurisdictions. Likewise, the three-judge panel said, last year’s Supreme Court decision in District of Columbia v. Heller did not apply to states or municipalities. The 1982 ban was challenged by the National Rifle Association and has already been appealed to the Supreme Court.
The case is particularly interesting because of the lack of precedent on incorporation, though the Ninth Circuit Court found in April that the Second Amendment is incorporated against the states. The Supreme Court has ruled in the past that under the 14th Amendment’s Due Process Clause, much of the Bill of Rights is incorporated against the states. (Blogger Eugene Volokh has more on the Privileges or Immunities Clause used in past 2A rulings.) Imagine a state forbidding freedom of speech and religion or allowing unreasonable searches and seizures — such laws would not stand. On the other hand, the Second Amendment doesn’t mention Congress as the First Amendment does, but simply says the right “shall not be infringed.” Yet states and municipalities infringe on that right all the time. And as we noted last week, Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor once wrote, “[T]he right to possess a gun is clearly not a fundamental right.”
Perhaps Investor’s Business Daily said it best: “The Circuit Court decision was written by Judge Frank Easterbrook and joined by Judges Richard Posner and William Bauer. Easterbrook’s reasoning is fascinating. According to him, the Revolution was fought and independence won so that the Founding Fathers could write a Constitution with a Bill of Rights that applied only to the District of Columbia.”
Talk about warped logic!
Tags: Law, News, Politics, RKBA, Second Amendment
Conservative Libertarian Outpost 