Do you have the right to bear arms if you live in Chicago? Or Des Moines, or New York City? If you thought that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution made that a clear “yes,” then you may be forgiven for thinking that some liberals disagree.
As this article in today’s WaPo describes, the answer to the question depends. Although, contra the Post’s assertion that there is a “coalition of libertarian, liberal and some conservative scholars and activists” that are together in this, conservatives should know that the Constitution means what it says:
the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
Since the Fourteenth Amendment provides equal protection for all citizens, it has been used to ensure that rights guaranteed under the federal Constitution apply within all states. This is the common sense meaning.
But, of course, that’s why we have so many lawyers: to torture common sense until it surrenders to political whims. Hence the city of Chicago, not content to wreck the Federal government with ObamaCronies, contends that “federalism” allows it to prohibit the Second Amendment within its garbage-strewn borders.
I suggest that Chicago also suspend its enforcement of the entire Bill of Rights, and the Thirteenth Amendment, as well. Might as well go all in, if we’re going to propose that federalism somehow justifies not adapting black-letter rights from the Constitution.