Redstate

By The Gadfly Posted in Law — Comments (4) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Following a historic Supreme Court ruling, Washington DC Mayor Anthony Fenton held forth

As mayor, although I'm disappointed in the court's ruling ... it is important to both respect the court's authority and then to act quickly.”

Police Chief Cathy Lanier said

We want to keep the number of public demonstration opportunities in the District to a minimum, but we're going to follow through and respect the decision of the courts.

And DC Delegate Elanor Norton Holmes said

You now have a handy free speech right in the house in case you need to use it in the neighborhood or somewhere else. These free speech rights are not going stay in the house.

Meanwhile in Chicago, Benna Ruth Solomon, deputy corporation counsel for Chicago said a challenge to her city's laws would first have to overcome prior court rulings that state the amendment do not apply to state and local governments. According to her the amendments apply to the District because it is a federal enclave. She said

Unless and until the court changes that interpretation, the restrictions of these amendments as interpreted today will not apply to state and local governments

In response to a question about the ruling while on the campaign trail, likely Democrat nominee Barack Obama answered

I know that what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne. Today's decision reinforces that if we act responsibly, we can both protect constitutional rights and keep our communities and our children safe.

Well, no, actually they were all talking about guns after the recent Heller decision. You can find their actual quotes here for DC and here for Chicago and Obama at the Washington Times. But to see the silliness of the quotes you really do need to insert some other constitutionally protected individual right. John McCain's notable quote was not only on the mark, but so well crafted I couldn't alter it to present his view while still making it look like he was talking about free speech or the right to assembly:

Unlike the elitist view that believes Americans cling to guns out of bitterness, today´s ruling recognizes that gun ownership is a fundamental right - sacred, just as the right to free speech and assembly*

While some legal “scholars” are pontificating that reasonable restrictions on the Second Amendment are constitutional and that the question of whether or not protection of this right is incorporated into a requirement on state or local laws, imagine them saying that about the right to free speech, assembly, freedom to worship, or habeus corpus. If legal precedent has meaning in the courts, the people propounding these theories should be laughed out of both learned and polite company. It is well established that rights which are explicitly protected by the constitution are fundamental rights, and that fundamental rights require narrowly tailored statutes which pass strict scrutiny. Any arguments to the contrary beg the question. Unfortunately, given the recent history of bad Supreme Court decisions (legal takings, death sentences for heinous crimes, jurisdiction over the military), such is not the case. But perhaps if we illustrate the argument clearly enough to enough people, we can begin to bring sanity back to our courts.

###

*I started mentally composing this blog on Friday when I read the first linked article in hardcopy while on the train. My thought went immediately to free speech and assembly as the rights I would choose to make apparent the stupidity of the arguments to intentionally craft the most restrictive laws possible while still complying with the SCOTUS ruling. I didn't find the McCain quote until today when I finally sat down to write the blog and find the references to link to the article.