Does the ACLU have a position on McDonald?

[Telperion]

I don't see the ACLU as amici in the Supreme Court filings and lower court filings. I find it strange and unlikely that a case that may fundamentally change the way civil rights are grounded in Constitutional law has not garnered their attention. Does anyone know what they are thinking, or perhaps not thinking?

[dustoff31]

They are probably in the fetal position, screaming and crying, wishing McDonald had never happened.

I don't find it at all strange or unlikely that the ACLU (except for the NV chapter perhaps) has absolutely no interest in standing up for the 2A.

[Quser.619]

Besides there's no pay-day at the end for them.

[Telperion]

I can understand their consistency in wishing Heller and now McDonald never happened; however, reviving P|I and overturning Slaughterhouse has implications beyond the 2A. I find it strange and unlikely they haven't thought about it.

[dustoff31]

however, reviving P|I and overturning Slaughterhouse has implications beyond the 2A. I find it strange and unlikely they haven't thought about it.

Perhaps they have thought about it and decided McDonald is going to win and do that for them. They will reap the benefits without "dirtying their hands" with the 2A.

[GrizzlyGuy]

See the comments at the bottom of this unrelated ACLU blog post. Looks like some pro-2A tag-teaming by Daniel and Brad.

Down in comment 10, they get this:

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.

No mention of McDonald, until Nicolo sums things up pretty well in the last comment (#29):

Wow. I'm shocked like may others here about the ACLU's stance on the 2nd Amendment. I came here today looking for some guidance on McDonald v. City of Chicago which is before the Supreme Court this session. This case involves not only the 2nd Amendment but also the Due Process Clause and Privileges and Immunities Clause of the 14th Amendment which describe how the Bill of Rights is applied in individual states. As a Chicago resident, I am confronted with the infringement of 2nd Amendment rights everyday, so I'm extremely disappointed that not only is there no guidance provided on McDonald v. City of Chicago, there's not even a discussion of District of Columbia v. Heller. I can only conclude that the ACLU doesn't want to offend their liberal donor base. Funny thing is, I'm a liberal myself and appreciate the work of the ACLU on a range of other issues I believe in. However, rather than joining the ACLU today as I had intended, I've learned an unfortunate lesson about their politics and the limits of their support for my rights as an individual.

[yellowfin]

Aside from the obvious intellectual dishonesty of the collective rights nonsense, is there actually another right they can point to as an example of a collective right? Any at all, much less any other spot in the Constitution?

[misterjake]

ACLU= American Casual Liberties Union

[Theseus]

Correct me if I am wrong, but as a member organization don't they have to elect their leaders? If this is so then perhaps we should become members to help motivate change there?

[coolusername2007]

The ACLU is currently licking their wounds. They just lost 25% of their donations. Can you believe one guy is essentially responsible for 25% of all the crap the ACLU does? I suppose a weak economy is good for some things, go figure.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,579882,00.html

[Aegis]

The ACLU is currently licking their wounds. They just lost 25% of their donations. Can you believe one guy is essentially responsible for 25% of all the crap the ACLU does? I suppose a weak economy is good for some things, go figure.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,579882,00.html

I was glad to read that a big chunk of their funding has been eliminated. I have no use for an organization which claims to defend the civil liberties of people, yet fails to recognize the 2A.

[wash]

If I have problems with any civil rights beside the second amendment, I will happily accept the help of the ACLU in my defense.

Think about it, even if they supported the second they couldn't do it as well as the NRA, SAF or CGF can do it.

I don't give them any money but I don't care about their second amendment stance all that much. They would be perfect if they said we believe in the second amendment as an individual right but we leave that fight for the experts.

[aileron]

Aside from the obvious intellectual dishonesty of the collective rights nonsense, is there actually another right they can point to as an example of a collective right? Any at all, much less any other spot in the Constitution?

no... of course not... no one can, hard as they might try... but i'm just being baited by your sarcasm.

[Saym14]

the ACLU fights to protect gay rights, animal rights, criminals rights and minorities rights. they have no interest in gun rights.