Congress's Duty to D.C. Residents
|
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
Considering the Supreme Court's broad decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, I'm surprised that The Post would continue to raise the tired old canard of home rule ["Trigger-Happy on the Hill," editorial, July 25].
Last month, the Supreme Court affirmed that Americans have an individual right under the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms.
Just as with the First Amendment, it matters not a whit whether we reside in the state of Indiana or the District of Columbia. We are protected by the same Bill of Rights.
Sadly, since the announcement of the Heller decision, we have seen the D.C. Council continue to thumb its nose at the Constitution and defy a clear Supreme Court order by largely maintaining its draconian handgun ban.
Moreover, when Congress chose to delegate home rule to the District in the 1970s, it specified that legislation enacted by the District must be "consistent with the Constitution of the United States," and it "reserve[d] the right, at any time, to exercise its constitutional authority as legislature for the District, by enacting legislation for the District on any subject."
The time is now for Congress to step in to protect the rights of law-abiding Americans.
MARK SOUDER
U.S. Representative (R-Ind.)
Washington
