美國控槍 立法院和執法院背道而馳

控槍問題再成爭議焦點，美國參議院和最高法院走向分裂

GLENN THRUSH 2022年6月24日

 

周四，最高法院前的一名電視台記者。此前最高法院推翻了紐約限製在公共場所攜帶槍支的法律，該法已有100年曆史。這是多年來對槍支問題的最重大裁決。 HAIYUN JIANG/THE NEW YORK TIMES

 

華盛頓——在這個經常為政府的不作為之舉充當背景板的首都，很少會看到像這樣的情形：在同一天的兩個小時內，這個國家最具爭議的問題之一——槍支——令兩個政府分支朝著完全相反的方向行進。

 

周四下午12點30分剛過，參議院將一項兩黨支持的控槍法案推進到下一環節，盡管隻是微小的一步，但這仍然是幾十年來最重要的槍支安全措施。上午10點30分，最高法院給槍支監管帶來決定性的、具有鮮明黨派立場的一擊，可能令國家槍支政治在今後數年裏保持右傾。

 

結果是槍權運動在法庭上取得了巨大的勝利，同時，那些要求對近期布法羅和得州尤瓦爾迪的大屠殺作出回應的人取得了重要的立法成就，盡管沒有前者顯著。在這個大規模槍擊頻發、犯罪率上升的時代，保守派正加緊推動擴大槍權和第二修正案的範圍，令人對國家槍支政策的方向愈發感到困惑。

 

“真是不得了的一天，”吉福茲法律中心的首席法律顧問亞當·斯卡格斯說。該中心是國家槍支安全組織的法律部門，由前眾議員加布裏埃爾·吉福茲創建，他是亞利桑那州民主黨人，也是2011年圖森附近槍擊事件的幸存者。

 

“參議院終於就這些改革達成了兩黨共識，主要在於一群共和黨參議員聽取了選民需要采取措施的呼籲，”他補充說。“接著，最高法院完全劫持了這一切，它對槍權的解釋與民主黨人、獨立人士甚至許多共和黨人想要的完全不符。”

 

“這下會走向何方？”

 

最高法院決定廢除紐約限製在公共場合攜帶槍支的法律，這項法律已有有100年曆史，這是多年來在槍支方麵最重大的裁決，也是法院關於持有和攜帶武器權利的第二次重大聲明。

 

在多數意見書中，克拉倫斯·托馬斯大法官表示，限製第二修正案的權利相當於限製第一修正案的言論自由權，或限製每個美國人根據第六修正案“與對其不利的證人對質”的權利。批評者很快指出，行使這些權利很少涉及使用致命武力。

 

短期內，該裁決迫使包括紐約、加利福尼亞和新澤西在內的五個州大幅放鬆槍支管製。

 

本月，斯塔斯基·威爾遜和兒子梅森參加了在華盛頓舉行的反對槍支暴力遊行。 KENNY HOLSTON FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES

 

托馬斯在長達130頁的意見書中寫道，各州可繼續在“敏感”公共場所——如學校、法院和政府大樓——禁止槍支，但警告地方當局不應過於寬泛地定義此類場所。“簡而言之，”他補充說，“僅僅因為曼哈頓島很擁擠並受到紐約市警察局的普遍保護，紐約就將其宣布為‘敏感地區’，是沒有曆史依據的。”

 

雖然這項多數判決沒有明確提到聯邦槍支監管，但司法部的律師正在評估該裁決對其程序的影響。他們認為一些限製將繼續有效，例如關於攜帶武器進入法庭的限製，但對郵局、博物館和其他目前禁止槍支的設施尚不確定。

 

盡管外界普遍預計目前的最高法院會削弱各州的槍支法律，但這個時間點還是有點出人意料：國會和白宮的大多數助手都認為，隨著即將結束的本庭期預計會以羅訴韋德案的判決作為完結篇，紐約州步槍與手槍協會訴布魯恩案備受期待的裁決將於下周出爐。

 

本周，焦點完全集中在參議院，它設法就一整套槍支監管規定達成了來之不易的妥協。這些規定將擴大對21歲以下潛在購槍者的背景調查，包括將認真的約會對象納入一項阻止家暴者購買槍支的法律範圍之內，並為各州的“紅旗”法律提供聯邦資金，該法律允許從被視為危險者手中暫時收繳槍支。

 

該方案的最終投票預計最早將於周四晚間進行，預計會吸引一些共和黨人的支持。這將使2022年6月23日成為美國數百年多災多難的槍支曆史上最重要的日子之一。

 

最高法院的裁決被認為有助於民主黨人通過參議院法案，司法部二號人物莉薩·莫納科譴責該裁決“非常令人失望”，對結果難以接受的紐約市長埃裏克·亞當斯則誓言要阻止紐約變成“蠻荒西部”。

 

“今天，預防槍支暴力法律的狀況與48小時前不同了，”美國曆史最悠久的控槍組織之一布雷迪的會長克裏斯·布朗說。“這一裁決隻能更加突顯出參議院迫切需要采取行動並通過這項法案。”

 

持槍權利組織對這項裁決表示歡迎，認為這是對紐約、加州、新澤西和其他州不斷增加的槍支限製的必要憲法製約。“法院已經明確表示，第二修正案規定的攜帶武器的權利不僅限於家宅中，”頂級槍支行業組織全國射擊運動基金會的高級官員拉裏·基恩說。

 

康涅狄格州民主黨參議員克裏斯托弗·S·墨菲一直是參議院周四提出的兩黨槍支立法的主要談判代表之一。 KENNY HOLSTON FOR THE NEW YORK TIMES

 

對於那些支持槍支管控法案的參議院共和黨人，該裁決提供了一些潛在的政治掩護。該法案的主要共和黨支持者、得克薩斯州參議員約翰·科寧在上周的一次州黨內集會上遭到了槍權活動人士的一片噓聲。

 

南卡羅來納州共和黨參議員林賽·格雷厄姆在裁決後發表了一份聲明，對該法案的兩黨合作表示讚賞，隨後又為槍權進行了激烈的辯護。

 

“這是屬於第二修正案的偉大一日，”他寫道。“最高法院的裁決再次證明，憲法第二修正案是一項個人權利，植根於保護自己和財產的能力。”翻譯：晉其角、明齋

暴力和死亡，穿透美國內心的毒箭  2022年6月1日

加州教會槍擊案背後的台灣身份認同之爭  2022年6月13日

得州小學槍擊案致至少21人遇害  2022年5月25日  

為什麽美國有那麽多大規模槍擊案？ 2017年11月8日

In One Day, Washington Goes in Two Directions on Guns

The Supreme Court delivered a victory for gun rights, while the Senate passed a gun control bill for the first time in decades.

 

A television reporter in front of the Supreme Court on Thursday, after the court struck down New York’s 100-year-old law restricting the carrying of guns in public, the most sweeping ruling on firearms in years.Credit...Haiyun Jiang/The New York Times

By Glenn Thrush June 23, 2022

 

WASHINGTON — The nation’s capital, so often a backdrop for inaction, had seldom witnessed anything quite like it — two branches of government splintering in opposite directions on guns, one of the country’s most divisive issues, in the space of a single day.

Around 10 p.m. on Thursday, the Senate passed a bipartisan gun control bill that however incremental is still the most significant gun safety measure in decades. Yet 12 hours earlier, the Supreme Court delivered a decisive, sharply partisan blow to gun regulations, jolting national firearms policy to the right, perhaps for years.

The result was a monumental victory in the courts for the gun rights movement and a less significant but important legislative accomplishment for those demanding a response to the recent massacres in Buffalo and Uvalde, Texas. For the country there was an ever deepening confusion about the direction of national gun policy in an era of mass shootings, rising crime and a surging conservative push to expand gun rights and the reach of the Second Amendment.

“What a day,” said Adam Skaggs, chief counsel with the Giffords Law Center, the legal arm of the national gun safety group created by former Representative Gabrielle Giffords, the Arizona Democrat and survivor of a 2011 shooting near Tucson.

“The Senate was finally getting to bipartisan consensus on these reforms, mainly because a bunch of Republican senators heard from their voters that something needed to be done,” he added. “Then the Supreme Court completely hijacks everything with an interpretation of gun rights that is completely out of step with what Democrats, independents and even a lot of Republicans wanted.

“Where does it all go from here?”

The court’s decision to strike down New York’s 100-year-old law restricting the carrying of guns in public is the most sweeping ruling on firearms in years, and only the court’s second major statement on the right to keep and bear arms.

In the majority opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas compared restrictions on Second Amendment rights to limits on the right of free expression under the First Amendment and every American’s Sixth Amendment right to “confront the witnesses against him.” Critics were quick to point out that exercising those rights seldom involved the use of lethal force.

In the short term, the ruling forces five states, including New York, California and New Jersey, to drastically loosen their gun regulations.

Starsky Wilson and his son, Mason, attended the March for Our Lives rally against gun violence in Washington this month. Credit...Kenny Holston for The New York Times

In his sweeping 130-page opinion, Justice Thomas wrote that states may continue to ban guns in “sensitive” public places — like schools, courts and government buildings — but warned that local authorities should not define the category of such places too broadly.

“Put simply,” he added, “there is no historical basis for New York to effectively declare the island of Manhattan a ‘sensitive place’ simply because it is crowded and protected generally by the New York City Police Department.”

While the majority decision did not explicitly address federal regulation of firearms, Justice Department lawyers are assessing the consequences of the ruling on their procedures. Some restrictions, they believe, like the one on carrying weapons into courts, will remain in effect — but they are less sure about restrictions in post offices, museums and other facilities where guns are currently banned.

Although the court was widely expected to weaken state gun laws, the timing was a slight surprise: Most aides in the Capitol and at the White House believed the widely-anticipated decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen would come next week, as the court neared the coda of a term expected to be capped by an ending of Roe v. Wade.

This week, the focus was squarely on the Senate, which had managed to hash out a hard-won compromise on a package of gun regulations that would expand background checks for potential gun buyers under the age of 21, include serious dating partners in a law that prevents domestic abusers from purchasing firearms and provide federal money for state “red flag” laws to allow guns to be temporarily taken from people deemed dangerous.

With the passage of the measure on Thursday evening, June 23, 2022, became one of the most important days in America’s troubled centuries-old history with guns.

The Supreme Court decision — denounced by Lisa Monaco, the No. 2 Justice Department official, as “deeply disappointing” while a defiant Mayor Eric Adams of New York vowed to keep the city from becoming the “wild, wild West” — was seen as helping Democrats make the case for passing the Senate bill.

“The landscape for gun violence prevention laws is different today than it was just 48 hours ago,” said Kris Brown, the president of Brady, one of the country’s oldest gun control groups. “That decision has only underscored the urgent need for the Senate to act and pass this bill.”

Gun rights organizations in turn welcomed the ruling as a necessary constitutional check against the growing restrictions imposed in New York, California, New Jersey and other states. “The court has made clear that the Second Amendment right to bear arms is not limited to the home,” said Larry Keane, a top official with the gun industry’s top trade group, the National Shooting Sports Foundation.

Senator Christoher S. Murphy, Democrat of Connecticut, has been one of the lead negotiators on the bipartisan gun legislation passed by the Senate on Thursday.Credit...Kenny Holston for The New York Times

The decision gave some potential political cover to the Senate Republicans who have backed the gun control bill, which earned its main Republican sponsor, Senator John Cornyn of Texas, a fusillade of boos from gun rights activists at a state party gathering last week.

Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, followed up a statement applauding the bipartisanship of the legislation with a blistering defense of gun rights in the wake of the ruling.

“Great day for the Second Amendment,” he wrote. “The Supreme Court’s decision is yet another example of reinforcing the concept that the Second Amendment is an individual right rooted in the ability to defend oneself and property.”