The death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia shined a ray of hope into the hearts of many anti-gunners. Along with Clarence Thomas, Scalia made up the backbone of the court’s pro-2A stance on many landmark cases over the years.
With Scalia dead gun control advocates believe that the door is open for a reversal on many of those critical rulings that protect one’s right to keep and bear arms, including the Heller decision, which confirmed that the Second Amendment is an individual right, not connected to militia service.
Last Thursday, for example, Chelsea Clinton, who was attending an event in Maryland, spoke about the opportunity for the (Hillary) Clinton administration to undo all the progress that’s been done.
“It matters to me that my mom also recognizes the role the Supreme Court has when it comes to gun control. With Justice Scalia on the bench, one of the few areas where the Court actually had an inconsistent record relates to gun control,” Chelsea Clinton said, as the Free Beacon reported. “Sometimes the Court upheld local and state gun control measures as being compliant with the Second Amendment and sometimes the Court struck them down.”
“So if you listen to Moms Demand Action and the Brady Campaign and the major efforts pushing for smart, sensible and enforceable gun control across our country, disclosure, have endorsed my mom, they say they believe the next time the Court rules on gun control, it will make a definitive ruling,” Clinton continued. “So it matters to me that my mom is the only person running for president who not only constantly makes that connection but also has a strong record on gun control and standing up to the NRA.”
To translate, the next president will likely select Scalia’s replacement. If Hillary Clinton is the next president, one can rest assured that she will appoint an individual who shares her vision of what the Second Amendment ought to say. One can reasonably assert that if that happens, the bench will swing to a 5-4 majority in favor of gutting one’s right to keep and bear arms.
How does this shake out legislatively? Well, let’s look at some of the looming questions for the court:
First, and as mentioned, Heller asserts that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right. You can bet that that’ll be the first thing the new SCOTUS will target. Once it reverses Heller, one’s Second Amendment right will be contingent upon militia service. In other words, if you don’t belong to a militia, you don’t technically have a right to keep and bear arms. Practically speaking, this creates an environment where all sorts of gun bans would now be permissible because of the militia mandate.
Second, the high court has not made a decision on the constitutionality of black rifle bans. You can bet that the new SCOTUS would tackle this issue and assert that, although they are commonly owned and widely popular, bans on ‘assault weapons’ are constitutional. This would mean the beginning of the end of civilian ownership of AR-15s, AK-47s, basically any semiautomatic firearm with a detachable magazine. This ruling alone would Europeanize America’s gun laws.
Lastly, the high court has not specifically ruled on whether the 2A protects one’s right of self-defense outside the home. The new SCOTUS would rule that it does not — that one’s right of self-defense does not extend to the public square. Consequently, may-issue (CLEO sign-off required) and no-issue (ban on CCW) concealed carry standards would be considered constitutional. This would single-handedly kill concealed carry across the country.
So, yeah, the fate of the Second Amendment is bleak if Clinton takes office. There are no two ways about it. Vote in 2016. Make it count. Our rights depend on it.