Men Are Going to Strike Back
Wait, That's Why Dems Are Scared About ICE Agents Wearing Body Cams
Bill Maher Had the Perfect Response to Billie Eilish's 'Stolen Land' Nonsense
Some Guy Wanted to Test Something at an Anti-ICE Rally. Their Reaction Says...
The Trump Team Quoted the Perfect TV Show to Defend a Proposed WH...
Why This Former CNN Reporter Saying He'd Fire Scott Jennings Is Amusing
Democrats Have Earned All the Bad Things
Gold Medal Motherhood
TMZ's Halftime Show Poll Isn't Going the Way They Hoped
Bakari Sellers Says America Needs a 'Fumigation' of MAGA
Don Lemon Plays Civil Rights Martyr After Cities Church Mob Arrest
Canadian PM Carney Just Announced a Plan to Make Canadian Inflation Worse
CA Governor Election 2026: Bianco or Hilton
Same Old, Same Old
The Real Purveyors of Jim Crow
Tipsheet

Sotomayor on the Second Amendment - Evasive and Hostile

Guest post from Brian Darling

Senator Orin Hatch (R-UT) and Senator Jon Kyl (R-AZ) engaged in detailed questioning of Sotomayor’s views on the Second Amendment.  Judge Sotomayor seemed hostile and evasive to the concept that the Second Amendment protects and individual right of all Americans against an action by a state to seize firearms.  A senior Senate staffer concluded that “she confirmed her view that gun ownership is not a fundamental right.”

Advertisement

Sotomayor seemed evasive when questioned by Senator Hatch whether she relied on the 1886 case Presser v. Illinois to hold that the Second Amendment was not a fundamental right.  Sotomayor said, "It may have.  I haven't read it recently enough to remember exactly."  Hatch made the case that Sotomayor in the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals case, Maloney v. Cuomo applied the wrong standard of review.  [# More #] Senator Hatch said “I believe you’ve applied the wrong line of cases in Maloney, because you were applying cases that used the privileges and immunities clause and not cases that used the 14th Amendment due process clause.”  Hatch made the case that Sotomayor’s line of reasoning would allow any decision by a state or local government to pass constitutional scrutiny if merely rationally based.  Sotomayor responded that “well, all standards of the court are attempting to ensure that government action has a basis.”  Not much of an answer and Sotomayor seemed evasive in explaining her reasoning for the Maloney case other than that she was following a precedent.  Not much analysis.   

Senator Kyl asked Sotomayor whether she would recuse herself from any Supreme Court decision relating to the divergent Second Amendment decisions of the 9th and 7th Circuit Court of Appeals that direcly address the incorporation argument at issue in Maloney.  Sotomayor refused to state that she would recuse herself from these similar cases.  Kyl made the case that Sotomayor’s participation in the 9th or 7th Circuit Court of Appeals incorporation Second Amendment cases may lead to an appearance of impropriety.  One could come to the conclusion that Sotomayor would be protecting her rational in Maloney if she refused to incorporate the 2nd Amendment on the states.  The responses to Kyl’s line of questioning evidenced hostility to the clear reading of the words of the 2nd Amendment that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” 

Brian Darling is Director of Senate Relations at the Heritage Foundation

Advertisement

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Townhall Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement