Hillary Clinton To Challenge SCOTUS: The Supreme Court ‘Is WRONG On The Second Amendment’ (Audio)

Hillary Clinton To Challenge SCOTUS: The Supreme Court ‘Is WRONG On The Second Amendment’ (Audio)

A leaked audio from a campaign event in New York, revealed that Hillary Clinton plans to challenge the Supreme Court of the United States, saying that they got the Second Amendment wrong and pledged to “make the case” against the SCOTUS ruling every chance she gets.

The audio was uncovered by the Washington Free Beacon from an October 2015 fundraiser and is now being highlighted by the NRA and the RNC.

According to Breitbart, in the audio, Clinton said, “I do not believe that the NRA represents most gun owners; they sure don’t represent the majority of Americans.” She went on to say the NRA has “intimidated” Congress and state legislatures not simply into inaction on gun control but into “passing the most absurd laws.” She particularly criticized open carry laws.

She said the NRA is “pernicious” and has a “corrupting influence,” and talked of being proud of watching her husband go after the NRA via the 1994 “assault weapons” ban. She made clear that she will be going after SCOTUS in the same way. Clinton said, “We’ve got to got after this. And here again, the Supreme Court is wrong on the Second Amendment. And I am going to make that case every chance I get.”

Although the audio recording offers no clarity as to where exactly Clinton believes SCOTUS got it “wrong” on the Second Amendment, Clinton spokesman Josh Schwerin has since made it abundantly clear that Hillary’s disagreement is with the District of Columbia v Heller (2008) decision. Heller was a reaffirmation that the Founding Fathers wrote the Second Amendment to protect a fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.

 Clinton’s disagreement with the Heller decision runs so deep that she twice refused to admit the right to bear arms is constitutional during the June 5 airing of This Week with George Stephanopoulos. When Stephanopoulos first asked her if the right to bear arms is constitutional, she would only obfuscate, saying:
I think that for most of our history there was a nuanced reading of the Second Amendment, until the decision by the late Justice [Antonin] Scalia. And there was no argument until then that localities, and states, and the federal government had a right–as we do with every amendment–to impose reasonable regulations.

Stephanopoulos followed up, pressing her to give a direct answer as to whether the right to bear arms is constitutional. Clinton said, “If it is a constitutional right, then it–like every constitutional right–is subject to reasonable regulation.”

Leave a Reply