Supreme Court Justice Ret. John Paul Stevens has a book out and in it he proposes several major changes to the United States Constitution. Chief among them is his desire to take guns away from every individual United States citizen in the country. Why? Well, one look at his voting record and you can see his true liberal colors bleed through.
The 2nd Amendment in the Bill of Rights reads as follows:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Stevens would insert six words into the 2nd Amendment, essentially rendering it null and void. His proposal would read:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, when serving in the militia, shall not be infringed.
In a recent interview with Stevens about his proposal to the 2nd Amendment, George Stephanopoulos asked, “Wouldn’t that take away any limits to what a legislature could do to the rights of gun owners?”
To which Stevens replied, “I think that’s probably right, but I think that’s what should be the rule; that it should be legislatures, rather than judges who draw the line on what is permissible.”
Stephanopoulos followed up: “But to be clear, if Congress passed a national ban on individual gun ownership, that would be constitutional under your amendment.”
“I think that’s right,” Stevens said.
What Stevens wants to do, is what every liberal wants – to increase government and decrease individual liberty. By giving the states the authority to grant or prohibit gun ownership, he is saying that the Bill of Rights be damned, we (the government) just don’t think you citizens can be trusted with guns. His stance on this is so laughably transparent as to be ridiculous. The Bill of Rights is and always has been a charter of individual liberties, NOT collective liberties. But given his way, Stevens’ revisionist history would switch that around.
And to think, in the beginning of this interview, Stevens categorized his proposals as “moderate.”
“I think every one of my proposals is a moderate proposal.”
The other changes he would make?
- The “Anti-Commandeering Rule” (Amend the Supremacy Clause of Article VI) This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges and other public officials. in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.
- Political Gerrymandering – Districts represented by members of Congress, or by members of any state legislative body, shall be compact and composed of contiguous territory. The state shall have the burden of justifying any departures from this requirement by reference to neutral criteria such as natural, political, or historical boundaries or demographic changes. The interest in enhancing or preserving the political power of the party in control of the state government is not such a neutral criterion.
- Campaign Finance – Neither the First Amendment nor any other provision of this Constitution shall be construed to prohibit the Congress or any state from imposing reasonable limits on the amount of money that candidates for public office, or their supporters, may spend in election campaigns.
- Sovereign Immunity – Neither the Tenth Amendment, the Eleventh Amendment, nor any other provision of this Constitution, shall be construed to provide any state, state agency, or state officer with an immunity from liability for violating any act of Congress, or any provision of this Constitution.
- Death Penalty– (Amend the 8th Amendment) Excessive Bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments such as the death penalty inflicted.
- The Second Amendment – (Amend the 2nd Amendment) A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.
At least his radical ideas won’t be taken seriously anymore since he doesn’t have a vote on the court.