By Tom Reynolds S.C.O.P.E. Treasurer and Director 

Per SCOPE’s Articles of incorporation, we are dedicated to preserving the Constitution and in particular the Second Amendment. Let’s explore what that means. When any law is proposed, the first question should be: is it constitutional? (The second question is: if it is constitutional, is it good law?) What is the basis on which it should be decided if it is constitutional?

The late Justice Antonin Scalia was an outspoken believer that the words in the Constitution mean what they say and not what judges wish they said. The words have to be interpreted to mean what they meant when the constitution was signed or the amendment was enacted. This is known as “Textualism”. Unfortunately, the Progressive Left believes that only when their interpretations fail should the court reluctantly refer to the actual written words.

Of overriding importance, words need to be taken “In Context”. A sentence may mean one thing when standing alone but quite another when taken in context of the body within which it was written. When interpreting any part of the Constitution, that part does not stand alone and must be interpreted within the intention of the entire document; and that overriding intention was to limit the powers of the Federal Government.“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed” must be interpreted in the context of the limited powers of the federal government to infringe on it.

Does that mean that non-federal government bodies, such as the states, can infringe on our rights? The 14th Amendment says, “No state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States”. What part of “No state shall…” does the liberal left not understand?

Further enforcing the founders idea of a limited government, several states insisted on a “Bill of Rights” before they would approve the Constitution. (New York was one of those that insisted, which demonstrates how far the SAFE Act has taken NYS from its roots.)The primary authors of the Federalist Papers, James Madison and Alexander Hamilton, believed the Bill of Rights was not necessary since the limited powers of the government would not enable it to take away rights. Happily, those favoring a written Bill of Rights prevailed. Can you imagine today’s gun debate if there were no Second Amendment?

The Constitution was written to stand the test of time. It dealt as much with human/political behavior as it did with the functioning of government. The framers set political ambition and jealousies in opposition to each other by creating three coequal branches of government. The principles embedded in the Bill of Rights transcend time; they are applicable as long as political human nature exists.

The Second Amendment is as central to the Constitution as is the Senate, the Presidency, the Judiciary or the Commerce Clause. Those attacking the Second Amendment are not attacking some adjunct piece of the Constitution, they are attacking the Constitution itself, just as much as if they were conspiring to bypass or eliminate the powers of the Senate.

Presidents, Congress, the Supreme Court all take an oath to defend and support the Constitution of the United States against all enemies and that they will bear true faith and allegiance to the same. Defend means: secure, shield, uphold, guard, preserve, protect. Support means: care for, back, uphold, boost, defend. Per their oaths of office, they are obligated to do the same. This applies to the entire document, not just those parts that they like. Anything less violates their oath of office.

Supreme Court Justice and uber-liberal Sonia Sotomayor wrote in a dissent concerning one of Barack Obama’s overreaches, “The people should not have to wait for Congress to act”. The majority of the Supreme Court felt that the people SHOULD WAIT for Congress to act since that is the way the Constitution requires legal actions to be taken. It also raises the question of how did Sotomayor become the people’s unelected representative? If there is a group that believes the Constitution is outdated and changes are needed, the legal way is by amending the Constitution. It’s been done twenty seven times. Only one of those Amendments took rights away from the people (Eighteen – Prohibition) and that one was the only Amendment ever reversed.

“We the people” are in charge, not unelected judges and we need to take back that power. As Alexander Hamilton said, “Liberty can have nothing to fear from judges who uphold the law. But liberty has everything to fear if judges try to legislate, too.” Justices must not be allowed to usurp the people’s constitutional powers by rewriting laws to align with their personal views. The Constitution is a living document in the sense that its principles live on and are applicable to all generations.