YouTubeXLinkedInFacebookTelegramTelegramRumbleRumbleInstagram

Ken Klukowski: The Gun Rights Decision in McDonald v. Chicago

By |2020-04-23T21:54:04-04:00June 29th, 2010|

ACRU Senior Legal Analyst Ken Klukowski wrote this column appearing on Townhall.com on June 29, 2010.

On June 28, the Supreme Court handed down the most consequential decision of this term in the historic gun-rights case, McDonald v. Chicago. Now the Second Amendment right to own a gun extends against every level of government, in a complex 5-4 decision that shows President Obama is using the Supreme Court to push a gun-control agenda.

After the 2008 Heller case holding that the Second Amendment secures an individual right, the biggest question for anyone working in constitutional law was simple: Does the Second Amendment provide a right […]

Ken Klukowski: Elena Kagan's Opposition to Gun Rights

By |2020-04-23T21:54:04-04:00May 14th, 2010|

ACRU Senior Legal Analyst Ken Klukowski wrote this column appearing on Townhall.com on May 13, 2010.

A third instance of Elena Kagan opposing Americans’ Second Amendment right to own a gun has now become public, and is sure to become a major issue in her Supreme Court confirmation hearings. And it confirms that President Obama’s gun-control agenda is to create a Supreme Court that will “reinterpret” the Second Amendment until that amendment means nothing at all.

This year, no case on the Supreme Court docket is more important than McDonald v. Chicago, where the Court is deciding whether the Second Amendment […]

Peter Ferrara: Take the Painkiller and Go Home

By |2023-03-10T08:04:52-05:00April 23rd, 2010|

ACRU General Counsel Peter Ferrara wrote a column appearing on the American Spectator website on April 21, 2010.

The defining moment for the Presidency of Barack Obama came early, in June, 2009. It was one of many health reform extravaganzas to come, this one televised by ABC from the East Room of the White House, a town hall among health care experts and consumers.

Citizen Jane Sturm took the mic to ask how the brave, new world of Obamacare would treat people like her 105-year-old mother. At age 99 her mother’s heart specialist confided that without a pacemaker he couldn’t keep her alive, but at […]

FCC 'Distinguished Scholar' Trashes the First Amendment

By |2020-04-23T21:53:46-04:00March 31st, 2010|

A “distinguished scholar” at the FCC has written in favor of government payments for and control of aspects of Internet communications. Her purpose is to favor news that the government prefers, and to “filter” and counterbalance news that the government finds to be lacking. She demonstrates thinking that King George III exemplified, and the exact opposite of the thinking of Thomas Jefferson, concerning freedom of the press.

* * *

Some of the facts for this article, but none of the legal conclusions, come from an article in CNS News on 31 March, 2010. It is an article […]

Ken Blackwell: Guess Who's Coming to Your House? Hidden Dangers in Obamacare

By |2020-04-23T21:54:05-04:00March 10th, 2010|

ACRU Senior Fellow Ken Blackwell wrote this column appearing on Townhall.com on March 10, 2010.

It’s all supposed to be voluntary, those “home visits” that are tucked into the mammoth ObamaCare bill. If you have a strong stomach, and stronger bottom, you can find home visitation on pages 568-595. That’s Section 2951 of H.R. 3590, the Senate bill that Harry Reid brought down the chimney on Christmas Eve.

All voluntary, they say, but once you “volunteer” to have the oh-so-helpful folks from Social Services come in to help with your newborns, or with a number of other specified issues, will you ever be able […]

Ken Klukowski: McDonald Gun-Rights Case: Round One Goes to the NRA

By |2020-04-23T21:57:15-04:00January 25th, 2010|

There is growing tension between the pro-gun parties to the upcoming Supreme Court gun-rights case. Perhaps concerned about the direction this case was going, the Court has taken the unusual step of granting the NRA's motion to be given separate time to speak during oral arguments. Round One in this historic fight for the right to bear arms goes to the NRA.

Ken Klukowski: High Court Rejects Challenge to NRA's Signature Law

By |2020-04-23T21:54:05-04:00December 20th, 2009|

In 2005, the National Rifle Association of America enacted a law that probably saved the American gun-making industry from bankruptcy. And just this last week, the Supreme Court rejected a constitutional challenge to this landmark legislation, ensuring this law stays on the books to preserve America's culture of lawful firearm ownership.

McDonald v. City of Chicago

By |2020-04-23T21:54:06-04:00December 3rd, 2009|

The case McDonald v. City of Chicago presents to the Supreme Court the issue of whether the Second Amendment right to bear arms is applicable to state and local governments, or instead is only a right that Americans have against the actions of the federal government. Specifically, the question is whether the right to bear arms applies (or is “incorporated”) to the states through either the Privileges or Immunities Clause or the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

On November 23, the ACRU, joined by three other organizations, argued that the Second Amendment should be incorporated to the states through the Privileges or Immunities Clause, […]

The Other Voting Right: Protecting Every Citizen's Vote by Safeguarding the Integrity of the Ballot Box

By |2020-04-23T21:59:34-04:00September 1st, 2009|

There is a saying that "people get the government they vote for." The implication of the maxim is that if undesirable or unwise legislation is enacted, if executive branch officials are inept or ineffective, or if the government is beset with widespread corruption, then such unfortunate results are the consequence of the electorate's decision regarding whom to trust with the powers and prestige of public office. The Constitution does not forbid people from enacting wrongheaded policies. If voters elect leaders that fail them, then the citizenry is saddled with the consequences of its choice until the next election. Such is the reality in a democratic republic. But this argument begs the question of whether voters did in fact elect the individuals who take their oaths of office.

Go to Top