Totally Hitlarious: Chris Murphy Worries About Dem Party’s Credibility If Platner Isn’t Pr...
Bernie’s Journey: A Vast Distance Separates Sanders’ Reactions to Brett Kavanaugh and...
The Odyssey Backlash Is 'Transphobia and Racism' Under the Guise of Historical Accuracy
Old Audio Casts Doubts on Abdul El-Sayed’s Claim He Never Called to Defund...
Pearl-Clutching Grifters: Bulwark's Fake Platner Skepticism Exposed
Politico Correspondent Clarifies How Graham Platner Is Not ‘DSA-Backed’
After Latest Platner Scandal, Bill Kristol Notes the GOP Nominated Ken Paxton
Hot Take: If Platner Was Blackout Drunk, How Do We Know She Didn’t...
Sunny Hostin’s 'Vote Blue No Matter Who' Brain Rot: Ride or Die for...
NYT Columnist Charles Blow Defends Platner Staying in the Race, Citing Donald Trump,...
Jill Filipovic Praises Dems for Discovering Sex Pests Are Bad — Just as...
‘I Believe Jenny’: MN Lt. Gov. Peggy Flanagan Now Believes a Woman
Dulling Her Sparkle: Congressman to File Articles of Impeachment Against Biden Activist Ju...
Graham Platner Superfan Bernie Sanders Recommends He Step Aside in Tear-Stained Post
'Florida Dodged a Bullet': Ex-Gov Dem Nominee Andrew Gillum Busted Last Night in...

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