Mouthful of Madness: Canadian Pol Rattles Off Uber-Inclusive String of Letters, Numbers, a...
Bash and Burn: CNN Celebrates D.C. Magazine’s Glowing Profile of Its Third Place...
WaPo Columnist Makes the Case Against Muslim Assimilation
Full House Actress Reveals She Was Under Anesthesia During OJ Simpson Bronco Case...
Nuns Suing New York State Over Law Requiring Them to Affirm Gender Identity
Michael Moore Still Hates the USA: Praises Iran's 'Greatest Civilization' and Calls Americ...
Iryna Zarutska‘s Murderer Found 'Incapable to Proceed' With His State Trial
Denial Ain't Just a River In Egypt: Abi Spanberger Refuses to Accept Her...
Tucker Guest Seth Harp Burns Source Like an Amateur: Names Army Leaker in...
Harmeet K. Dhillon Trolls Troll Marc Elias (and Looks Fabulous Doing It)
Newsweek: New Poll Claims Over Half of Americans Want Congress to Impeach...
You Can’t Make This Up: Iowa 'Pastor' Sprints Full Speed From 'Is God...
Sen. Schumer's 'Military Moron' Swipe at Trump Accidentally Kicks Biden (AND Chuck) Right...
Impeachment Inquiry Leader Rep. Dan Goldman Says Impeachment Doesn't Cut It Anymore
Lawrence O'Donnell Says This ONE Thing Trump Did Is Why 25A Exists (and...

Alan Dershowitz asks why states can't regulate guns but can ban abortions

A lot of people are dunking on The Hill for this, but it’s actually an opinion piece by law professor Alan Dershowitz, which makes it even more dunk-worthy. There’s a very simple answer to what he’s asking.

Advertisement

Dershowitz writes:

Defenders of this decision will argue that the right to bear arms is explicitly guaranteed by the Second Amendment, whereas there is no explicit reference to abortion in the Constitution. This argument goes too far.  The Second Amendment itself has limiting language in the words “well-regulated militia,” strongly suggesting that the states have the power to regulate gun ownership. Moreover, even though the word “abortion” is not in the Constitution, the Fourth Amendment guarantees the right of the people, including women, to be secure in their persons. At the time of the Framing, the words “secure” described what we today call “the right of privacy.”

So here’s another person who never read the second half of the Second Amendment, which does more than “strongly suggest” that the right of the people to bear arms shall not be infringed. This argument is so disingenuous … Dershowitz uses the definition of “secure” at the time of the Framing, but ignores the definition of “well-regulated” at the time of the Framing.

Advertisement

Advertisement

Dershowitz knew he was going to get dunked on and tried to weasel his way out of it with that nonsense paragraph above.


Related:

Join the conversation as a VIP Member

Recommended

Trending on Twitchy Videos

Advertisement
Advertisement
Advertisement