| 
In Second Amendment case, PLF and Cato urge Supreme Court to abandon "selective" defense of constitutional rights
Amicus brief calls for overturning Slaughter-House precedent that undermines property rights and economic freedom, as well as gun-owners’ rights.
WASHINGTON, D.C.; November 23, 2009: Pacific Legal Foundation, the nation’s leading public interest legal foundation devoted to limited government, property rights, and economic freedom, today asked the United States Supreme Court to overrule a 136-year-old precedent that has dramatically undermined constitutional protections for individual freedom, economic liberty, and civil rights.
PLF is joined in its arguments by the Cato Institute, the nation’s most influential libertarian think tank. The joint PLF-Cato friend of the court brief, filed in the high-profile Second Amendment case of McDonald v. Chicago, asks the Court to ensure that states and local governments respect not only the right to keep and bear arms, but all rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.
Timothy Sandefur
PLF Attorney
|
"This could easily be the most important Supreme Court decision of the decade," said Timothy Sandefur, the Pacific Legal Foundation attorney who wrote the brief. "This case isn’t just about gun rights, as important as those are. This is a case about whether and how states are required to respect individual rights. It gets to the core of the constitutional system."
The brief specifically asks the Court to overrule its 1873 decision in the Slaughter-House Cases. This was the first Supreme Court decision to interpret the Fourteenth Amendment, specifically its mandate that "No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities" of all Americans.
"Unfortunately, the Court basically erased the Fourteenth Amendment’s ‘Privileges or Immunities’ Clause," said Sandefur. "This gave states latitude to do more or less whatever they felt like, even if they abridged people’s rights as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution."
"The immediate result of the Slaughter-House Cases was that federal protections for former slaves were severely weakened, and it took another century for the government to take serious steps to protect civil rights in the south," Sandefur continued. "But the decision’s destructive impact reaches into modern times, by limiting the rights that we enjoy as Americans. Instead of enforcing all constitutional rights against infringements by states and localities, as the ‘Privileges or Immunities’ Clause requires, the Supreme Court has ignored that clause and has been selective and incomplete in requiring states to respect constitutional rights."
Most importantly, courts have failed to give full protection to economic freedom. "There’s very old precedent saying everyone has a constitutional right to earn an honest living without unreasonable government interference," Sandefur explained. "But courts today rarely give this right any serious protection. States and local governments are allowed to put very severe burdens on entrepreneurs and business owners. If the Court overrules its old decision and restores vigor to the Fourteenth Amendment, it might provide meaningful protection for working people."
Summary: In the important Second Amendment case now before the Supreme Court, PLF and the Cato Institute urge the overturning of the Slaughter-House Cases, a 136-year-old precedent that undermines property rights and economic liberties, as well as the Second Amendment. The case is McDonald v. Chicago, No. 08-1521. The PLF-Cato brief is available on PLF’s Web site.
About Pacific Legal Foundation
Pacific Legal Foundation is the oldest and most successful public interest legal organization dedicated to property rights, limited government, and a balanced approach to environmental protection.
|
|