Administration's calls for ban echoed by bi-national panel of former government officials and scholars, and by a former Bush administration official

By Chad D. Baus

On February 25, 2009, headlines such as ABC News' "Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban" turned an election-related spike in gun sales into a frenzy that has only recently begun to moderate.

The news of a pending push by Obama to ban many semi-automatic rifles was sparked by comments from newly-minted Attorney General Eric Holder, who told reporters that "As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons." He went on to indicate that the administration had decided on a new angle of attack to push for the ban: the war on drugs.

Holder said that putting the ban back in place would not only be a positive move by the United States, it would help cut down on the flow of guns going across the border into Mexico, which is struggling with heavy violence among drug cartels along the border.

"I think that will have a positive impact in Mexico, at a minimum." Holder said at a news conference on the arrest of more than 700 people in a drug enforcement crackdown on Mexican drug cartels operating in the U.S.

Despite claims of a gun trafficking highway running from the U.S. the Mexico having been immediately and thoroughly debunked (see here and here and here) the president said at a press conference in Mexico City in April that he has "not backed off at all from my belief that the assault weapons ban makes sense."

Last week, even as Holder indicated his office is "currently reviewing existing gun laws to determine how best to combat gun violence and keep guns out of the hands of criminals and others prohibited from possessing them," echoes of the Obama administration's calls for a gun ban became even louder.

By Ashby Jones

Our interest in a single Supreme Court case has perhaps never been as high as it is in a case currently being briefed. The issues are fascinating on several levels, and the potential impact of a ruling is big.

The case is McDonald v. City of Chicago, for which the court granted cert on Sept. 30. The petitioners in the case, a group challenging a gun-control ordinance in Chicago, filed their brief with the court earlier this week. Were the court to adopt their position — something well within the realm of possibility — we could be looking at a significant shift in the way the justices view the Constitution and individual rights.

At issue, again, is the constitutionality of a gun-control ordinance in Chicago. The Supreme Court shot down Washington, D.C.'s gun-control ordinance two terms ago, in D.C. v. Heller. But the Heller opinion dealt with a federal statute, not a state statute, and several federal courts have since ruled that the Heller opinion does not apply to state statutes. That is, the Second Amendment does not (yet) apply to the states.

Click here to read the entire op-ed from the Wall Street Journal.

Related Story:
Buckeye Firearms Foundation and USCCA file brief in U.S. Supreme Court case