[Congressional Record Volume 143, Number 93 (Friday, June 27, 1997)]
[Senate]
[Page S6781]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                DECISION STRIKING DOWN PART OF BRADY LAW

 Mr. KOHL. Mr. President, I rise to discuss today's Brady law 
decision, in which a deeply divided Supreme Court put judicial activism 
over public safety. At a time when the United States leads the world in 
gun carnage, surely the Federal Government is entitled to enlist the 
aid of States to keep guns out of the hands of felons, illegal 
immigrants, and the criminally insane. Asking local police to conduct 
background checks--and nothing more--hardly amounts to a Federal power 
grab, as the majority has claimed. Instead, the majority's opinion 
should make us fear what the Supreme Court could do next.
  Will the Court prohibit Congress from requiring States to report 
missing children? Will it bar Congress from requiring states to get 
lead out of school drinking water? Will it stop Congress from requiring 
States to publicly disclose where hazardous waste is being stored?
  All of these requirements are now current law, and all of them are 
now in peril.
  We will have to consider these troubling issues in the future. But as 
for today, this decision alone is hardly a fatal blow to the Brady law 
itself. Since its enactment, Brady background checks have stopped over 
186,000 persons from obtaining guns. And these Brady checks will 
continue for two reasons. First, virtually all of the police officers 
we have spoken to say they will continue to do the Brady check 
voluntarily--even if they are not required to do so. The reason why is 
simple: they know these checks save lives. Second, the provision struck 
down by the Court only relates to the so-called interim Brady law. By 
the end of next year, Brady requires that a permanent instant check 
system be implemented. And that system, operated by Federal officials, 
will be immune from constitutional challenge.
  Still, the Supreme Court's misguided decision opens up the 
possibility that, before the instant check system becomes fully 
operational, a handful of rogue police officers will refuse to do 
background checks. As a result of such inaction, at least a few felons 
will commit violent crimes with guns they never should have been able 
to obtain.
  For this reason, we are working with the President to draft 
legislation that will ensure 100 percent Brady compliance--for example, 
by allowing gun dealers to obtain background checks from any police 
chief in their State, not just the chief in the jurisdiction where the 
buyer resides. Because the vast majority of police will continue to 
conduct Brady checks voluntarily, this approach will clearly preserve 
our no check, no sale policy.
  Mr. President, today's Supreme Court ruling, while unfortunate, does 
not take away from how effective the Brady law has been or will be. But 
it is nevertheless a bad decision that will hurt us in our fight 
against crime. We'll introduce bipartisan legislation to fix it, and I 
hope my colleagues will support our efforts.

                          ____________________