The Kansas City Star

Wednesday, May 8, 2002, Page A-3

Agency propounds gun right

Solicitor general backs individual right to bear arms

                                                         Star News Services

WASHINGTON – The Justice Department has declared that the Constitution gives individuals the right to own a gun, a position that largely reverses six decades of federal policy.

In briefs filed late Monday with the U.S. Supreme Court, the Justice Department rejected a long-held interpretation that the Second Amendment guarantees gun rights only to militias, not to individuals.

The department’s stance elevates a long-simmering battle between the gun lobby and gun control advocates to the high  court, with Attorney General John Ashcroft and the Justice Department voicing their strongest support yet for the gun lobby.

The National Rifle Association applauded the Justice Department’s stance.  Gun law scholars and gun control advocates said they were alarmed, because the shift in position threatens to undermine a range of gun laws.

Since the 1930s, the federal government and the courts have declared almost without exception that people have no constitutional right to own a gun and that the government can pass laws restricting who can own a gun and what types of weapons they can own.

In two pending appeals, however, the Bush administration asserted for the first time before the Supreme Court that it thinks that legal reasoning is flawed.

“The current position of the United States ….. is that the Second Amendment more broadly protects the rights of individuals, including persons who are not members of any militia or engaged in active military service or training, to possess and bear their own firearms,”  Solicitor General Theodore Olson wrote in a footnote to the briefs.

That right, Olson acknowledged, is subject to certain restrictions that allow the government to keep weapons out of the hands of  “unfit persons” and to ban certain types of weapons often used by criminals.

The briefs do not ask the court to take any action.  In both cases, defendants charged with gun offenses raised Second Amendment defenses and appealed to the Supreme Court.

One is Emerson v. United States, No. 01-8780, an appeal by a doctor who was charged with violating a federal law that makes it a crime for someone to own a gun while under a domestic violence restraining order.

The other is Haney v. United States, No. 01-8272, an appeal by a man convicted of owning two machine guns in violation of federal law.  

Olson urged the Supreme Court to turn down both appeals.  He said that even accepting an individual right to bear arms, the application of the laws in both cases

reflect the kind of restrictions by which that right can reasonably be limited.  Consequently, there was no reason for the court to take either case, the briefs said.

  Copyright 2002 The Kansas City Star