On May 26, the Chicago Tribune published an editorial in which it claimed the NRA is exaggerating Hillary Clinton’s threat to gun rights.
Focusing on the Supreme Court, the Tribune claimed there is no guarantee that Republicans would confirm Clinton’s appointees to the highest court, and even if they did, there is no guarantee those justices would revisit landmark decisions like District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) or McDonald v. Chicago (2010).
In the event that they did revisit the decisions and overturn them, the Tribune claims that would not necessarily change state-by-state gun laws in the U.S., so the “NRA’s worst-case scenario is greatly exaggerated.”
So what if Clinton becomes president and nominates an anti-Second Amendment justice to replace Antonin Scalia, and what if that justice is confirmed? According to the Tribune, even then, concern would be unwarranted because the Republicans will almost certainly retain the House beyond 2016, thereby mitigating any chance that a gun control law would be passed. Furthermore, the absence of a new law takes away any real chance that gun control would be pushed to the Supreme Court for review–at least the Tribune’s editorial board sees it that way.
AWR Hawkins is the Second Amendment columnist for Breitbart News and political analyst for Armed American Radio. Follow him on Twitter: @AWRHawkins. Reach him directly at email@example.com.