Heller Decision and the Second Amendment

So, we've been getting a lot of comments about the ACLU's stance on the Second Amendment. For those of you who didn't catch our response in the blog comments, here it is again:

The ACLU interprets the Second Amendment as a collective right. Therefore, we disagree with the Supreme Court’s decision in D.C. v. Heller. While the decision is a significant and historic reinterpretation of the right to keep and bear arms, the decision leaves many important questions unanswered that will have to be resolved in future litigation, including what regulations are permissible, and which weapons are embraced by the Second Amendment right that the Court has now recognized.

As always, we welcome your comments.


Add a comment (1408)
Read the Terms of Use


As he said above. I just took the money I had slated to re-up my ACLU membership and used it to re-up my NRA membership AND my Ohio CCW application.

Sorry ACLU you lost me as well.


The ACLU is a joke!!!! Point blank. The ACLU is not concerned about if the rights of a person is "individual" or "collective" but how much money they can get from one group to front their kind of SOCIAL injustice. So who cares if the SCOTUS made the ruling that the Second Amendment is an Individual right like all the rights in the Bill of Rights.

Hey ACLU take a leap of a short peer!!!!!!


Even if there were any basis for describing the Second Amendment as a "collective right," a view that most legal scholars and all nine Supreme Court Justices have rightly rejected, such a "right" would be meaningless without a strong individual component enforceable by individuals. No one individual has a right to determine an election or the ability to "peaceably assemble" on his own, so if any constitutional rights can truly be described as "collective," it would be those two. Imagine a Kafkaesque world in which "the people" purportedly enjoy these cherished rights collectively, but no individual has an enforceable right to cast his individual ballot or come to the assembly. What on earth would this "collective right" protect?

Your organization's reliance on such sophistry with an eye to literally decimate the Bill of Rights, first by dishonestly pretending to "agree" with a cryptic 70-year old ruling that said no such thing, and now by openly disagreeing with the Supreme Court for unanimously endorsing a view that an overwhelming majority of Americans has taken for granted all along, is proof positive that you are not now, nor have you ever been, a civil liberties union.

Dean J

I find it harder and harder to justify giving your organization my money, if you're going to spend it shooting down my other civil liberties.


After this statement regarding the 2nd by he ACLU, their right to exist as a org. should be denied.

Your political agenda is showing.

Byron Dickens

Earth to ACLU: The Constitution means what the Supreme Court says it means. Grade-school grammar led them to reach the only logical conclusion they could. Any Fifth-Grader knows that in a complex sentence the clause that can stand on its own as a complete sentence is the main thought. Remedial grammar may be in order for you.

How is it that the phrase "the people" elsewhere in the Constitution refers to you and me, but in the Second Amendment - and only in the Second Amendment - it refers to the state?

I guess there's some truth to the old joke, "How does the ACLU count to ten? 1,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10."

Joe Cool

Shame on you ACLU - the one amendment put in place to be able to defend all the others is the one you shun and pretend doesn't mean what it says, what most people think and what the Supreme Court has now said it means. The Bill of Rights applies to all individuals and all rights. Your stance is illogical and smacks of an agenda that is Socialist as opposed to Libertarian. Try changing your name to the ASU - American Socialist Union - because that's what it appears your agenda is all about.


So when SCOTUS said: "but what is
not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct." they are wrong and the ACLU has decided to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct. I was wondering; did you take a vote of the members, some type of lawyer poll or in some other way try to find out how all of your members feel or did you just get a few phone calls from some of the anti-gun foundations and George Soros telling you that if you started taking gun cases they would drop your funding?

You need to change your name to American Some Civil Liberties Union


The ACLU's mission statement is and I quote..

The American system of government is founded on two counterbalancing principles: that the majority of the people governs, through democratically elected representatives; and that the power even of a democratic majority must be limited, to ensure individual rights.

Majority power is limited by the Constitution's Bill of Rights, which consists of the original ten amendments ratified in 1791, plus the three post-Civil War amendments (the 13th, 14th and 15th) and the 19th Amendment (women's suffrage), adopted in 1920.

The mission of the ACLU is to preserve all of these protections and guarantees:

It is therefore ACLU's avowed intent to support the Bill of Rights in it's entirety and not as a pick 'n mix buffet.

The BoR addresses the inalienable and inherent rights of individuals and the Second Amendment remains one of them.

Consider the historically shameful and odious race and gender based basis of firearms controls.

Firearms law were, in the main, created to disarm and oppress people of colour and the economically disadvantaged.

I find it incomprehensible that the ACLU not only does not support the 2nd Amendment but interprets the constitution in such a racist manner.


American Civil Liberties Union - now farther from reality, yet closer to the Union's founders intent...the path to Collectivism.


Sign Up for Breaking News