Fabricating gun ruling's history
Monday, June 11, 2018
In a recent letter, Ken Soderstrom "reasons" that in the decade since the Heller gun control decision, the Supreme Court has refused even to review lower court decisions upholding regulations of semi-automatic weapons, not because the justices are having second thoughts about extending Heller beyond handguns, but simply because the justices are awaiting another Trump appointee to the court.
With all due respect, Trump has already replaced Justice Scalia with Justice Gorsuch, another NRA-endorsed appointee almost certain to vote like Scalia on the gun issue. So why the court's refusal to expand upon Heller? Well, just maybe the justices have begun to rethink Heller and the dubious NRA-funded Second Amendment "history" on which Heller was based.
After all, the first law review article supporting the Heller notion that the amendment grants individuals firearms rights was not published until 1960, and in a student note at that. Moreover, an extensive Library of Congress Second Amendment database going back to the 1790s contains virtually no reference to anything other than the traditional military/state militia construction of the amendment, and scant support for the Heller doctrine.
It appears that Soderstrom, like his favorite lobbyist the NRA, confuses the significant difference between researching — and fabricating — history.
Tinsley E. Yarbrough