|
John Paul Stevens on Gun Control
Supreme Court Justice (nominated by Pres. Ford 1975)
|
|
|
Weaken the NRA by repealing the Second Amendment
Retired Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens called to repeal the Second Amendment. Stevens, 97, moved by the March for Our Lives that drew hundreds of thousands of protesters across the country calling for action to end gun violence, penned an op-ed
published in The New York Times.Stevens called for a repeal of the Second Amendment to the Constitution in order to weaken the National Rifle Association's ability to "stymie legislative debate and block constructive gun control legislation."
"Rarely in my lifetime have I seen the type of civic engagement schoolchildren and their supporters demonstrated," Stevens wrote. "These demonstrations demand our respect. They reveal the broad public support for legislation to minimize the risk of
mass killings of schoolchildren and others in our society."
Stevens argues that a 2008 Supreme Court ruling, District of Columbia v. Heller, was wrongly decided, and "has provided the NRA with a propaganda weapon of immense power."
Source: ABC News' Paolo Chavez on 2018 Trump Administration
, Mar 28, 2018
Congress can regulate guns in school under Commerce clause
In U.S. v. Lopez (1995), Breyer authored a stinging dissent, joined by Justices John Paul Stevens, David Souter, and Ruth Bader Ginsburg,
defending Congress’s power to regulate the possession of guns in school zones across the nation as within federal authority over interstate commerce.
Source: (X-ref Breyer) SupremeCourtHistory.org
, Jan 1, 1995
Right to gun ownership is collective, not individual.
Justice Stevens wrote the dissent on District of Columbia v. Heller on Jun 26, 2008:
Overturning DC's handgun ban, the court ruled that the Second Amendment protects the individual right to own a gun for private use--not only in connection with service in a militia. The 5-to-4 decision, District of Columbia v. Heller, left unanswered questions, but also much room for continued gun regulation, short of an absolute ban.
HELD: Delivered by Scalia; joined by Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito
The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable the citizens' militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms.DISSENT #1: Stevens, joined by Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer
The Stevens dissent rests on four main points of disagreement:- that the Founders would have made the individual right aspect of the Second Amendment express if that was what was intended
- that the "militia" preamble demands the conclusion that the Second Amendment touches on state militia service only
- that many lower courts' later "collective-right" reading of the Miller decision constitutes stare decisis
- and that the Court has not considered gun-control laws (e.g., the National Firearms Act) unconstitutional.
DISSENT #2: Breyer, joined by Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg
Justice Breyer filed a separate dissenting opinion that, even with an individual-rights view, the DC handgun ban and trigger lock requirement would nevertheless be permissible limitations on the right. The Breyer dissent concludes, "there simply is no untouchable constitutional right to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas."
Source: Supreme Court case 08-HELLER argued on Mar 18, 2008
Page last updated: Feb 01, 2020