Cheney Joins Congress In Opposing D.C. Gun Ban

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Dec 19, 2006
Messages
591
Location
New York NY
Cheney Joins Congress In Opposing D.C. Gun Ban
Vice President Breaks With Administration

By Robert Barnes

Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, February 9, 2008; Page A01

Vice President Cheney signed on to a brief filed by a majority of Congress yesterday that urged the Supreme Court to uphold a ruling that the District of Columbia's handgun ban is unconstitutional, breaking with his own administration' s official position.

Cheney joined 55 senators and 250 House members in asking the court to find that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess firearms and to uphold a lower court's ruling that the D.C. ban violates that right. That position is at odds with the one put forward by the administration, which angered gun rights advocates when it suggested that the justices return the case to lower courts for further review.

In order to make his dramatic break with the administration, Cheney invoked his rarely used status as part of Congress, joining the brief as "President of the United States Senate, Richard B. Cheney." It is a position he has used at times to make the point that he is sometimes part of the legislative branch and sometimes part of the executive.

"That is one of his titles," Cheney press secretary Megan Mitchell said when asked whether it was significant that he had joined the brief in that capacity rather than as vice president.

The position puts Cheney at odds with a brief filed by U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement, who represents the government and the Bush administration before the Supreme Court. Clement said that the court should recognize the individual right but that the lower court's ruling was so broad it could endanger federal gun-control measures, such as a ban on possession of new machine guns.

Clement urged the court to send the D.C. law, the strictest in the nation, back to lower courts for further review.

The government's position, which technically supported neither the District nor those challenging the law, nonetheless infuriated supporters of gun rights. They saw it as an abandonment of their cause just as the court was ready to interpret the Second Amendment for the first time in 70 years.

The effort to draw up a brief for lawmakers was led by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Tex.). When she disclosed the names of her co-signers on Thursday, Cheney's was not among them. But his name was added when the legal brief was filed yesterday.

Lawyers said it may be unprecedented for a vice president to take a position in a case before the high court that is at odds with one the Justice Department puts forward as the administration' s official position.

"To my knowledge, I don't recollect it ever happening before," said Richard Lazarus, co-director of the Supreme Court Institute at Georgetown Law Center.

Bush spokesman Tony Fratto emphasized where the sides agreed rather than where they disagreed.

"Like the members of Congress who signed the amicus brief, the president strongly believes that the Constitution protects an individual right to keep and bear firearms," Fratto said.

"The president leaves procedural questions to the lawyers. What's most important is that this administration firmly supports the individual-rights interpretation of the Second Amendment."

Mitchell said Cheney signed on to the brief because "the vice president believes strongly in the Second Amendment." Reminded that it put him at odds with the administration' s official position, she repeated, "It's an issue he feels strongly about."

Neither Mitchell nor Fratto would say whether the president and the vice president talked about Cheney's decision.

"We're glad to have the vice president on board with the Second Amendment," said Alan Gura, one of the attorneys for the D.C. residents who challenged the law. He was sharply critical of Clement's brief when it was filed, saying it was "basically siding with the District of Columbia."

The District's argument takes the position adopted by a majority of the nation's appeals courts that the Second Amendment guarantees a right to bear arms only as a collective, civic right related to military service.

But even if the amendment provides an individual right, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit held last spring, the city argues that it may ban handguns if it allows citizens to own other kinds of firearms, such as rifles and shotguns.

Clement's brief said that was dubious but also said the appeals court was wrong to rule that just because handguns are "arms" as defined by the Second Amendment, government cannot ban them.

"If adopted by this court, such an analysis could cast doubt on the constitutionality of existing federal legislation prohibiting the possession of certain firearms, including machine guns. "

The congressional brief filed by Hutchison and others said lower-court review is unnecessary because the District's ban "is unreasonable on its face," no matter how lenient the standard of review.

National Rifle Association Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre called the congressional brief "a historical message to the court" that Congress believes the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to possess firearms. A statement from the organization said it is "grateful and fortunate to have a friend of freedom in the vice president."

Staff writer Michael Abramowitz contributed to this report.

LINK
 
Slap in the face to Bush?

Hope so. Someone needed to do it. If Bush had any brains left after these 8 years in office he'd instruct his SG to retract that horrible document immediately.

But he won't so this is a close second.

Frankly it might work out better this way since pointing out the government oversteps its bounds by meddling with the Bill of Rights is proven by what the Exec Branch has said about the whole thing. That a majority of Congress has signed on to disagree with the Executive speaks volumes in my opinion.
 
Dick Cheney Signing Congressional Amicus Curiae Brief

Statement From Wayne LaPierre And Chris W. Cox On Vice President Dick Cheney Signing Congressional Amicus Curiae Brief In D.C. Case

Friday, February 08, 2008

On behalf of four million NRA members and 80 million American gun owners, we would like to thank Vice President Dick Cheney for his strong support of the individual rights view of the Second Amendment. Today, in his capacity as President of the United States Senate, Vice President Cheney signed on to the congressional amicus curiae brief affirming the individual rights view of the Second Amendment. As Americans, we are grateful and fortunate to have a friend of freedom in the Vice President.

Led by Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison (R-Texas), bi-partisan majorities of the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives - in fact, the largest number of co-signers of a congressional amicus brief in American history - filed a strong brief in support of the individual rights view. 55 members of the Senate and 250 members of the House co-signed this brief along with the Vice President of the United States. This landmark brief argues that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual, fundamental right to Keep and Bear Arms; that any infringement on this right should be subject to the highest level of constitutional scrutiny; that D.C.'s categorical ban on handguns and self-defense in the home is unreasonable and unconstitutional under any level of review; and therefore, that the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit's opinion in this case should be upheld.

We would also like to thank the other parties who are filing briefs in support of freedom, including other pro-Second Amendment individuals and organizations, as well as an overwhelming majority of state attorneys general.

The NRA stated in its brief filed yesterday that "In adopting the Second Amendment, the Framers guaranteed an individual right to keep and bear arms for private purposes, not a collective right to keep and bear arms only in connection with state militia service." We remain hopeful that justice, freedom and the will of our founding fathers will prevail at our nation's High Court.

LINK
 
"A friend of Freedom" in the vice president. Good thing i wasn't taking a sip of my coffee i would have spit it on my monitor.
He appears to be working for us this time, which in my view goes against his nature and makes me suspicious. He does nothing for the good of the people purely.
 
The position puts Cheney at odds with a brief filed by U.S. Solicitor General Paul D. Clement, who represents the government and the Bush administration before the Supreme Court. Clement said that the court should recognize the individual right but that the lower court's ruling was so broad it could endanger federal gun-control measures, such as a ban on possession of new machine guns.

I haven't read the brief, myself, but does this really put him at odds with the SG? Is the brief that Cheny is on arguing for strict scrutiny?
 
I'd like to know what person does things "for the good of the people purely."

I'd be suspicous of anyone who makes such a claim.
 
The congressional brief argues that strict scrutiny is appropriate, but that the court of appeals should be affirmed no matter what level of scrutiny is applied.
The standard for whether a right is
“fundamental” is whether it is “explicitly or implicitly
protected by the Constitution, thereby requiring strict
judicial scrutiny.” San Antonio Independent School
Dist. v. Rodriguez, 411 U.S. 1, 17 (1973). The right of
the people to keep arms is obviously such a right. Yet
even if this Court applied a lower “reasonableness” test
as the standard of review, the District’s handgun ban
is unreasonable on its face. The lower court’s
categorical approach in holding a prohibition on
handguns to be unconstitutional per se was correct.
 
Well, his job is to serve the American people. I am not naive enough to think he or pretty much any of our elected officials actually do that. That is why i am urging caution, and not to let our guard down because he and the others signing on to this appear to be working for us. I don't think they ever do this unless they think they are getting a better deal for themselves by "giving" us something.
 
I, for one, am heartened to see this.

55 of 100 Senators, not bad.
250 of 435 Representatives, not bad.

And Cheney is an affirmed gun owner and shooter, if you recall :)

Sometimes, things are exactly as they appear. This might be one of those times.
 
"Like the members of Congress who signed the amicus brief, the president strongly believes that the Constitution protects an individual right to keep and bear firearms," Fratto said.

"The president leaves procedural questions to the lawyers. What's most important is that this administration firmly supports the individual-rights interpretation of the Second Amendment."

What procedural questions? As far as I'm concerned Bush believes that its the right of the Federal Government to do whatever they want to in the name of security and safety. I'll be glad to see him go, but probably won't like the next President.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top