Response to "Supreme Court justice wants to scrap 'failed' Second Amendment test"
Justice Jackson correctly proposes rejecting the Bruen standard
for interpreting the Second Amendment. The Supreme Court’s reliance on a
"traditions" test will only invite problems.
After all, some states had a tradition of preventing
African-Americans or other Americans of color from carrying firearms. Those
governments enacted weapons permits, taxes, or other abusive impositions to
discourage the free exercise of one’s God-given natural rights.
The state of Hawaii has consistently—and
unconstitutionally—argued that its wide array of gun control laws should be
upheld precisely because the state had a long tradition of gun control.
However, Jackson’s proposal for gun rules to address modern
problems is a misfire, inviting judicial activism. The Supreme Court must aim
for constitutionality, not ideologically driven social policy.
One feature of this role is to recognize that the Second
Amendment was never about limiting citizens' rights to keep and bear arms, but rather
preventing the government (local or federal) from infringing on those rights. At
the founding of the Republic, American citizens enjoyed the right to carry in
many locations and faced few limitations to the free exercise of that right.
The Court must establish a natural law standard, free from history
or partisan policy posturing.
.
No comments:
Post a Comment