Saturday, July 19, 2003

The CATO institute also question Sen. Hatch's & the NRA's motives in regards to his bill that would partially repeal D.C.'s anti-gun laws.

"All the facts point to an NRA effort to frustrate Parker,' noted Levy. 'Why was the bill introduced by Hatch rather than some back-bencher? Why not wait for a court decision (the legislative option is always open, even if the court were to go the wrong way on the Second Amendment)? Why did the NRA file its suit at the outset? Why did its suit include extraneous legal claims so the court could avoid the Second Amendment altogether? Why did the NRA move to consolidate its suit with Parker even though Parker is a clean Second Amendment case? Why bring John Ashcroft into the NRA suit, when he's so obviously an improper defendant in a civil case? Essentially, the NRA is saying, 'If we can't control the litigation, there won't be any litigation'. "

No comments: