Gun Owners Alliance ALERTS!

This is a text of Attorney General Ashcroft's General letter to all U.S. Attorney's regarding the Emerson case and the Second Amendment. It shows the significance of this historic case. Go to:

http://www.gunownersalliance.com/Emerson-01.htm
 

With Respect,

Gun Owners Alliance
Chris W. Stark - Director
**************************
 
 

                          Office of the Attorney General
(DOJ seal)                   Washington, D.C. 20530
                                November 9, 2001

MEMORANDUM TO ALL UNITED STATES' ATTORNEYS

FROM:        The Attorney General  <Ashcroft signature>

RE:              United States v. Emerson

       On October 16, 2001, the United States Court of Appeals for the
Fifth Circuit issued its decision in United States v. Emerson.  I am
pleased that the decision upholds the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C.
922(g)(8) -- which prohibits violent persons who are under restraining
orders from possessing firearms.  By taking guns out of the hands of
persons whose propensity to violence is sufficient to warrant a specific
restraining order, this statute helps avoid tragic episodes of domestics
violence.  As I have stated many times, reducing gun crime is a top
priority for the Department.  We will vigorously enforce and defend
existing firearms laws in order to accomplish that goal.

      Emerson is also noteworthy because, in upholding this statute, the
Fifth Circuit undertook a scholarly and comprehensive review of the
pertinent legal materials and specifically affirmed that the Second
Amendment "protects the right of individuals, including those not then
actually a member of any militia or engaged in active military service
or training, to privately possess and bear their own firearms . . . ."
The Court's opinion also makes the important point that the existence of
this individual right does not mean that reasonable restrictions cannot
be imposed to prevent unfit persons from possessing firearms or to
restrict possession of firearms particularly suited to criminal misuse.
In my view, the Emerson opinion, and the balance it strikes, generally
reflect the correct understanding of the Second Amendment.

      The Department can and will continue to defend vigorously the
constitutionality, under the Second Amendment, of all existing federal
firearms laws.  The Department has a solid obligation both to enforce
federal law and to respect the constitutional rights guaranteed top
Americans.  Because it may be expected that Emerson will be raised in
any number of firearms cases handled by this Department, it is important
that the Department carefully assess the implications of the Emerson
decision and how it interacts with existing circuit precedent.
Accordingly, United States Attorney's Offices should promptly advise the
Criminal Division of all cases in which Second Amendment issues are
raised, and coordinate all briefings in those cases with the Criminal
Division and the Solicitor General's office.

      As the Supreme Court has long observed, the mission of the
Department "in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case,
but that justice shall be done."  Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78,
88 (1935).  Justice is best achieved, not by making any available
argument that might win a case, but by vigorously enforcing federal law
in a manner that heeds the commands of the Constitution.
 

END OF LETTER