I still think commander and chief is a civilian postition. After all, Sec of Defense is also in charge of the military, but Rumsfield is certainly not a member of the armed forces any more then the Sec. of Education is.
The Constitution does not state that Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces is a civilian posistion. The Secretary of Defense position was not created by the Constitution. Therefore it would have to be decided by constitutional case law and prior precidence and accepted practices. Was Teddy Roosevelt allowed to carry a firearm? If so then Bush could show that there is precedence for doing so, modern times or not. Also, I believe that Andrew Jackson pulled a pistol on someone while president, I’ll have to research that one.
Yeah, but I don’t think there were many CW laws that had to be superseded back when Jackson was president (after all, tommy guns were legal back in the 20’s, so their can’t have been that many gun control laws back before then). I think Teddy and Jackson could carry weapons because back in the day everyone could, so their carrying them wouldn’t provide any sort of precedent.
Also, does a president (or anyone) just doing something set a legal precedent? I thought a precedent was a prior court decision, not just “someone did something similar a long time ago, and no one complained”.
I have to add that even people with Concealed Weapons Permits are not allow to take them anywhere they want. In fact, I could see that the Sargent of Arms of the Senate may have a problem with the President making the State of the Union Address with a firearm strapped to his hip. I can just see it: “Alright you nine old men, I said some of you would be retiring . . .,”
Anyone wanna bet that when Bush 43 is back in Crawford at Compound W, he’s got a gun or 3 available (and this drives the Secret Service nuts)? No self-respecting ranch owner would be without arms…
I don’t have anything substantive to add to the legal question about CCW in and around DC, but I will come down on the side of his status as CINC and head mofo law enforcer as being all the authority he needs…
Wow. This may actually turn into a debate. I actually thought there was a factual answer as to the Presidents status/authority on carrying a concealed weapon.
I was kind of thinking that his position as Commander-in-Chief gave him that authority, but LMM post is legally acurate. But what about the President being our nations top law officer. There must be a factual answer to this question somewhere!
Nine old men?
Anyways for the practical sake if a President wanted to dive their face into egg and demand they be allowed to carry a pistol they wouldn’t be stopped IMO. Local law enforcement is too political for anyone to bring out criminal charges, we would probably see some sort of civil case that ultimately never goes anywhere.
As it is though while Congress is in charge of approving spending the President does have constitutional control over executing the laws of the United States and in executing laws he has nealry “supreme” authority over the executive branch. And his executive orders pretty much carry the weight of law within the federal bureaucracy except for a few exceptions, and even outside of said bureaucracy.
So if he just released an EO saying, “The President, in the interests of national defense and in the Constitutional duty as CNC, shall be permitted to carry firearms with the same legal ability as any active duty military officer or any active duty Federal law enforcement agent” there is a very good chance it wouldn’t be opposed seriously.
In our legal system if there is no statutory or coded law dealing with this issue, and no legal precedent, then there really is no factual answer. We can just look to historical examples and try to infer what would be decided by a court.
In my defense, Ginsburg looks like a man . . .
But my point about the Sergant of Arms in the Senate is that he is not controlled by a local authority OR the Executive Branch. It would be one branch of the government challeging the other branch of the government. The exciting and riviting stuff that constitutional law cases are made of . . .
But what about the esteemed Justice Sandra Day O’Connor?
Would/Could this thread pique Cecil’s interest?
Wow. Fight my ignorance, MEBuckner, just fight it!
I wonder, how many of those are currently in force?
Tris
IIRC, after one of the school shootings Congress passed a law stating that you can’t have a firearm within a certain distance of a school no matter what the local ordinances might say.
As for President’s packing heat, I wouldn’t be surprised if LBJ didn’t carry one around at times.
[QUOTE=Tuckerfan]
IIRC, after one of the school shootings Congress passed a law stating that you can’t have a firearm within a certain distance of a school no matter what the local ordinances might say.
…QUOTE]
And the Supreme Court struck that down as unconstituional!
And the Supreme Court struck that down as unconstitutional!
[QUOTE=alphaboi867]
Gotta cite for that? Since I seem to recall rabid anti-gun crusader Rosie O’Donnell’s bodyguard getting busted for packing heat on school grounds.
The Court held that the connection of guns in school zones to interstate commerce was tenuous and thus the federal government had no authority to regulate the matter under the Tenth Amendment.
And Rosie O’Donnell
Her bodyguard was on school property without a permit, which is a totally different case than the Gun-free School Zone Act SCOTUS overturned. GFSZA tried to ban gun ownership in private homes and property within so many feet of a school.