Article Review - Constitution Check: Might the Second Amendment Be Redefined?

ARTICLE REVIEW - CONSTITUTION CHECK: MIGHT THE SECOND AMENDMENT BE REDEFINED?

Louis Moran

William Carey University

CRJ 3610 28

Abstract

In a recent article published by Constitution Daily’s Supreme Court correspondent Lyle Denniston, he discussed recent comments from Rick Manning, president of Americans for Limited Government (ALG), and Donald Trump, regarding Hillary Clinton’s potential impact on limiting individuals’ Second Amendment rights. Several key issues were identified as they pertained to a president’s ability to affect the limiting of an individual’s enumerated fundamental right – in this case, the right to have guns. Concerning Manning and Trump’s statements, themselves, the First Amendment provides a mechanism by which citizens may discuss the Constitution and what should or should not be protected. A key decision that clarified an individual’s right under the Second Amendment came as a result of District of Columbia versus Heller; in that decision, the Supreme Court clarified and affirmed not only the collective right, but also an individual’s right to have guns. History has shown that Supreme Court decisions tend to expand the meaning of a right, and rarely constrict an individual’s right that was explicitly in the Constitution. Denniston concluded that Clinton and by extension Trump’s impact on Second Amendment rights through limiting, or enhancing in the case of Trump, an individual’s right to have guns would be unlikely.

Discussion

One of the most debated and polarizing issues of our current political climate has been whether the Second Amendment provides for individual rights of gun ownership, or simply the collective right to possess guns. Not until the 2008 Heller decision has the Supreme Court so clearly established the individual’s right to own and possess guns; however, it did not eliminate the state’s ability to place limits on the time, place or location at which they may be carried. Denniston raised several key issues in his discussion of the impact of the Heller decision and the likelihood that a particular candidate could impact an individual’s gun rights.  

Key Issues

The First Amendment provides a mechanism by which citizens may discuss the Constitution and what should or should not be protected. As a founding principle of our Constitution and the littoral First Amendment articulated in the Bill of Rights, our fundamental right of free speech is essential for a well-informed citizenry, especially in times of social and political debate.

In an August 9th appearance on a political talk show, Donald Trump said “Hillary Clinton wants to essentially abolish the Second Amendment. And if she puts Supreme Court Justices on, she will decimate your Second Amendment.” (Denniston, 2016) The following day, Rick Manning, president of ALG, a conservative political advocacy group based in Fairfax, Virginia, commented on the statement adding, “By the end of Hilary Clinton’s first time in office, two out of every three federal judges will have been appointed by Democrat presidents. Who knows how many Supreme Court Justices she will appoint? But her aim is clear. She will appoint judges who will overturn D.C. V. Heller^[1], that would strip Americans of their [Second Amendment] rights – and maybe even their guns.” (Denniston, 2016)