- Created: Tuesday, 29 June 2010 16:42
- Written by Craig Fields
The hearings on Elena Kagan -- President Obama's radical pick to join the U.S. Supreme Court -- began yesterday.
This is a VERY IMPORTANT battle that gun owners must fight, as evidenced by the slim victory in the McDonald v. Chicago case that was handed down by the high Court yesterday.
Kagan doesn't have a record of judicial opinions, but her views on the Second Amendment are no mystery:
* Kagan drafted a directive in favor of a semi-automatic import ban while serving in the Clinton administration;
* As a law clerk, she advised against allowing the Supreme Court to hear arguments in Sandidge v. United States that the D.C. gun ban was unconstitutional;
* Kagan was also part of the Clinton team that pushed the firearms industry to include gun locks with all gun purchases and was in the Clinton administration when the president pushed legislation that would close down gun shows; and
* Just today, Kagan gave a hint to her true colors. When asked a simple question by Senator Grassley of Iowa -- does the Second Amendment codify a pre-existing right from God or is it a right created by the Constitution? -- Kagan looked like a deer caught in the headlights. After an awkward pause, she said: "I've never considered that question."
Yikes... the Supreme Court is no place for on-the-job training!
While two key Republican senators (Kyl and McConnell) had previously indicated that there would not be a filibuster of her nomination, Sen. McConnell seemed to open the door yesterday for such an action.
That's why all Senators (especially the Republicans!) need to hear from you during this confirmation battle.
Note: Bill Olson, the Gun Owners Foundation attorney who spearheaded our amicus brief before the Court in the Chicago case, is scheduled to testify before the Judiciary Committee in opposition to Elena Kagan later this week.
By the way, Justice Sonia Sotomayor's confirmation last year should now shed some important light on the Kagan hearings. McDonald v. Chicago is the first Second Amendment case that Sotomayor has dealt with as a Supreme Court Justice.
It's no surprise that she joined the anti-gun dissenters, but it highlights what a sham the judicial hearings are -- and how Senators should put no stock in a nominee's responses.
On July 14 of last year, Sotomayor was asked by Sen. Pat Leahy during the confirmation hearings:
"Is it safe to say that you accept the Supreme Court's Decision [in Heller] as establishing that the Second Amendment right is an individual right? Is that correct?"
Sotomayor responded: "Yes, Sir." In other words, she affirmed with her response that the right to keep and bear arms was a fundamental, individual right.
But then contrast this to the Chicago case where Sotomayor joined the dissent in stating:
"I can find nothing in the Second Amendment's text, history, or underlying rationale that could warrant characterizing it as 'fundamental' insofar as it seeks to protect the keeping and bearing of arms for private self-defense purposes."
Most people would say she lied to Senator Leahy and said whatever she needed to say to get confirmed... which is why Senators need to HEAVILY LOOK at Kagan's record, not only in what she might say during these hearings.
ACTION: Please... please... please... contact your Senators and urge them to oppose Elena Kagan for the U.S. Supreme Court.
You can use the Gun Owners Legislative Action Center to send a pre-written message to your Senators.