[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 656 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>






114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 656

 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Senate 
 should not confirm a nominee to the United States Supreme Court whose 
  professional record or statements display opposition to the Second 
      Amendment freedoms of law-abiding gun owners, including the 
fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms as affirmed in the 
 District of Columbia et al. v. Heller and McDonald et al. v. City of 
                    Chicago, Illinois, et al. cases.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 21, 2016

  Mr. Young of Indiana submitted the following resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
 Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Senate 
 should not confirm a nominee to the United States Supreme Court whose 
  professional record or statements display opposition to the Second 
      Amendment freedoms of law-abiding gun owners, including the 
fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms as affirmed in the 
 District of Columbia et al. v. Heller and McDonald et al. v. City of 
                    Chicago, Illinois, et al. cases.

Whereas the Second Amendment states: ``A well regulated Militia, being necessary 
        to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and 
        bear Arms, shall not be infringed.'';
Whereas, on February 13, 2016, Supreme Court Justice Antonin Gregory Scalia 
        passed away leaving a vacancy on the United States Supreme Court after 
        30 years of honorably serving on the Nation's highest court;
Whereas the loss of a staunch defender of the Second Amendment precipitates the 
        need to fill the vacancy on the Supreme Court bench with a similarly 
        minded defender of the Constitution and Bill of Rights;
Whereas, on June 26, 2008, in District of Columbia et al. v. Heller, 554 U.S. 
        570, the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment protects an 
        individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a 
        militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as 
        self-defense within the home;
Whereas, on June 28, 2010, in McDonald et al. v. City of Chicago, Illinois, et 
        al., 561 U.S. 742, the Supreme Court said: ``The Second Amendment 
        protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-
        defense, and we struck down a District of Columbia law that banned the 
        possession of handguns in the home. . . . We have previously held that 
        most of the provisions of the Bill of Rights apply with full force to 
        both the Federal Government and the States. Applying the standard that 
        is well established in our law, we hold the Second Amendment right is 
        fully applicable to the States.''; and
Whereas, in his majority opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller, Justice 
        Scalia steadfastly defended Second Amendment rights, stating: ``We start 
        therefore with a strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is 
        exercised individually and belongs to all Americans'': Now, therefore, 
        be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House that the Senate should 
not confirm a nominee to the United States Supreme Court whose 
professional record or statements display opposition to the Second 
Amendment freedoms of law-abiding gun owners, including the 
fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms as affirmed in the 
District of Columbia et al. v. Heller and McDonald et al. v. City of 
Chicago, Illinois, et al. cases.
                                 <all>