NRA formally opposes Sotomayor Nomination

Joined
Jan 24, 2007
Messages
10,358
Reaction score
52,000
Location
Arizona
Joint Statement On Judge Sonia Sotomayor's Nomination To The United States Supreme Court

Friday, July 17, 2009

WAYNE LAPIERRE, EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION

AND

CHRIS W. COX, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATION - INSTITUTE FOR LEGISLATIVE ACTION


Other than declaring war, neither house of Congress has a more solemn responsibility than the Senate’s role in confirming justices to the U.S. Supreme Court. As the Senate considers the nomination of Judge Sonia Sotomayor, Americans have been watching to see whether this nominee – if confirmed – would respect the Second Amendment or side with those who have declared war on the rights of America’s 80 million gun owners.

From the outset, the National Rifle Association has respected the confirmation process and hoped for mainstream answers to bedrock questions. Unfortunately, Judge Sotomayor’s judicial record and testimony clearly demonstrate a hostile view of the Second Amendment and the fundamental right of self-defense guaranteed under the U.S. Constitution.

It is only by ignoring history that any judge can say that the Second Amendment is not a fundamental right and does not apply to the states. The one part of the Bill of Rights that Congress clearly intended to apply to all Americans in passing the Fourteenth Amendment was the Second Amendment. History and congressional debate are clear on this point.

Yet Judge Sotomayor seems to believe that the Second Amendment is limited only to the residents of federal enclaves such as Washington, D.C. and does not protect all Americans living in every corner of this nation. In her Maloney opinion and during the confirmation hearings, she deliberately misread Supreme Court precedent to support her incorrect view.

In last year’s historic Heller decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the Second Amendment guarantees the individual’s right to own firearms and recognizes the inherent right of self-defense. In addition, the Court required lower courts to apply the Twentieth Century cases it has used to incorporate a majority of the Bill of Rights to the States. Yet in her Maloney opinion, Judge Sotomayor dismissed that requirement, mistakenly relying instead on Nineteenth Century jurisprudence to hold that the Second Amendment does not apply to the States.

This nation was founded on a set of fundamental freedoms. Our Constitution does not give us those freedoms – it guarantees and protects them. The right to defend ourselves and our loved ones is one of those. The individual right to keep and bear arms is another. These truths are what define us as Americans. Yet, Judge Sotomayor takes an opposite view, contrary to the views of our Founding Fathers, the Supreme Court, and the vast majority of the American people.

We believe any individual who does not agree that the Second Amendment guarantees a fundamental right and who does not respect our God-given right of self-defense should not serve on any court, much less the highest court in the land. Therefore, the National Rifle Association of America opposes the confirmation of Judge Sonia Sotomayor to the position of Associate Justice of the United States Supreme Court.

NRA-ILA :: Joint Statement On Judge Sonia Sotomayor's Nomination To The United States Supreme Court
 
Register to hide this ad
That isn't exactly what she said. To be fair, she said that the issue of incorpation of the 2nd Ammendment via the 14th isn't a settled matter of law, which is correct.

I find it odd that the NRA would come out vocally opposing the nomination, since at this point, it seems all but a done deal.
 
Even if it is a done deal, the NRA has every right to state their opinion, and if they feel like Sotomayor is a threat and kept quiet about it, they would be derelict in their duty to their membership.
 
I find it odd that the NRA would come out vocally opposing the nomination, since at this point, it seems all but a done deal.

Well Duh!!!!!!!!!! She's a definite threat to the 2nd Amendment, why would anyone think the NRA would just sit on their hands. Done deal or not .... you don't just throw in the towell and give up.

Don
 
Well Duh!!!!!!!!!! She's a definite threat to the 2nd Amendment, why would anyone think the NRA would just sit on their hands. Done deal or not .... you don't just throw in the towell and give up.

Don

Because losing a fight always looks bad.

There's also no real evidence that she's got a strong opinion about guns one way or another.
 
[
Because losing a fight always looks bad.

There's also no real evidence that she's got a strong opinion about guns one way or another.

:rolleyes: .............. Dilusional : Delusions are irrational beliefs, held with a high level of conviction, that are highly resistant to change even when the delusional person is exposed to forms of proof that contradict the belief. :D
 
Back
Top