\nThe National Rifle Association released the following statement this afternoon concerning the nomination by President Obama of Judge Merrick Garland to fill the late Justice Antonin Scalia’s seat on the US Supreme Court.<\/p>\n
\n\nSCOTUS Nomination: Merrick Garland<\/u><\/u><\/span><\/u><\/b><\/div>\n\n\u201cWith
\n Justice Scalia\u2019s tragic passing, there is no longer a majority of
\nsupport among the justices for the fundamental, individual right to own a
\n firearm for self-defense. Four justices
\n believe law-abiding Americans have that right \u2013 and four justices do
\nnot. President Obama has nothing but contempt for the Second Amendment
\nand law-abiding gun owners. Obama has already nominated two Supreme
\nCourt justices who oppose the right to own firearms
\n and there is absolutely no reason to think he has changed his approach
\nthis time. In fact, a basic analysis of Merrick Garland\u2019s judicial
\nrecord shows that he does not respect our fundamental, individual right
\nto keep and bear arms for self-defense. Therefore,
\n the National Rifle Association, on behalf of our five million members
\nand tens of millions of supporters across the country, strongly opposes
\nthe nomination of Merrick Garland for the U.S. Supreme Court.\u201d Chris W.
\nCox, executive director, NRA-ILA<\/u><\/u><\/span><\/i><\/div>\n\n<\/div>\n<\/u>\u00fc
\n<\/span><\/span><\/u>Merrick
\n Garland\u2019s record on the Second Amendment is unacceptable to anyone who
\nrespects the U.S. Constitution and an individual\u2019s fundamental right to
\nself-protection.<\/u><\/u><\/span><\/p>\n<\/u>\u00fc
\n<\/span><\/span><\/u>He
\n is the most anti-gun nominee in recent history. This should come as no
\nsurprise, given President Obama\u2019s disdain for the Second Amendment.<\/u><\/u><\/span><\/p>\n<\/u>\u00fc
\n<\/span><\/span><\/u>He has consistently shown a complete disregard of the rights of law-abiding gun owners.
\n<\/u><\/u><\/span><\/p>\n<\/u>\u00fc
\n<\/span><\/span><\/u>Garland\u2019s history of anti-Second Amendment rulings support the conclusion that were he to be confirmed he would vote to overturn
\nHeller<\/i>.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n\no
\n<\/span><\/span><\/u>In
\n 2007, he voted to give D.C. a second chance to have its handgun ban
\nupheld after a three-judge panel struck it down. At the time, this was
\nthe most significant
\n Second Amendment case in America. <\/u><\/u><\/b><\/span><\/div>\n\n<\/div>\n\n<\/u>o
\n<\/span><\/span><\/u>In 2004, Garland voted against rehearing another Second Amendment case (Seegars v. Gonzales)<\/i>, effectively casting a vote against the individual right
\n to keep and bear arms. <\/u><\/u><\/span><\/div>\n<\/p>\n
\n<\/u>o
\n<\/span><\/span><\/u>Justice Scalia was the author of
\nHeller v McDonald<\/i>. Heller<\/i> affirmed that the Second Amendment is an individual right. The
\nHeller<\/i> decision stands in the way of gun-control supporters\u2019 ultimate goal of banning and confiscating guns.
\n<\/u><\/u><\/span><\/div>\n<\/p>\n
\n<\/u>o
\n<\/span><\/span><\/u>If
\nHeller<\/i> is overturned, the Second Amendment for all intents and purposes would cease to exist.<\/u><\/u><\/span><\/div>\n\n<\/div>\n\n<\/u>o
\n<\/span><\/span><\/u>In
\n 2000, Garland voted in favor of the federal government\u2019s plan to retain
\n Americans\u2019 personal information from gun purchase background checks
\ndespite federal
\n laws prohibiting national firearm registration and requiring the
\ndestruction of these records.
\n<\/u><\/u><\/span><\/div>\n<\/p>\n
\n<\/u>o
\n<\/span><\/span><\/u> Judge Garland weighed in on several significant firearms-related cases, including
\nParker, Seegars, NRA v. Reno,<\/i>. He voted against the rights of firearm owners on each occasion.<\/span><\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n\n\u00fc
\n<\/span><\/span><\/u>The
\n examples of Garland\u2019s disdain for the right to keep and bear arms go on
\n and on, including in a major case upholding the then-existing Clinton
\n\u201cassault
\n weapons\u201d ban against a constitutional challenge<\/u><\/u><\/span><\/p>\n<\/u>\u00fc
\n<\/span><\/span><\/u>It\u2019s
\n almost certain that Garland agrees with Hillary Clinton when she said
\n\u201cthe Supreme Court is wrong\u201d that the Second Amendment protects an
\nindividual
\n right.<\/u><\/u><\/span><\/p>\n<\/u>\u00fc
\n<\/span><\/span><\/u>In
\n his nomination, President Obama has again placed partisanship and
\nantagonism towards gun owners above the higher callings of his office.
\n<\/u><\/u><\/span><\/p>\n<\/u>\u00fc
\n<\/span><\/span><\/u>If
\n Garland is confirmed, Obama would be taking America back in time to an
\nera where Supreme Court justices uphold the anti-gun policies of the
\npresident.
\n Obama is hoping Garland will overturn the Supreme Court precedent that
\nstands in the way of confiscatory gun control, like the gun ban and
\nconfiscation programs implemented in Australia.<\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n