IV 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 656 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the Senate should 

not confirm a nominee to the United States Supreme Court whose 

professional record or statements display opposition to the Second 

Amendment freedoms of law-abiding gun owners, including the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms as affirmed in the 

District of Columbia et al. v. Heller and McDonald et al. v. City of 

Chicago, Illinois, et al. cases. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 21, 2016 

Mr. YOUNG of Indiana submitted the following resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

the Senate should not confirm a nominee to the United 

States Supreme Court whose professional record or statements display opposition to the Second Amendment freedoms of law-abiding gun owners, including the fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms as affirmed in the District of Columbia et al. v. Heller and 

McDonald et al. v. City of Chicago, Illinois, et al. cases. 

Whereas the Second Amendment states: ‘‘A well regulated 

Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, 

the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not 

be infringed.’’; 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 656 IH 

Whereas, on February 13, 2016, Supreme Court Justice 

Antonin Gregory Scalia passed away leaving a vacancy on 

the United States Supreme Court after 30 years of honorably serving on the Nation’s highest court; 

Whereas the loss of a staunch defender of the Second 

Amendment precipitates the need to fill the vacancy on 

the Supreme Court bench with a similarly minded defender of the Constitution and Bill of Rights; 

Whereas, on June 26, 2008, in District of Columbia et al. v. 

Heller, 554 U.S. 570, the Supreme Court held that the 

Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and 

to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as 

self-defense within the home; 

Whereas, on June 28, 2010, in McDonald et al. v. City of 

Chicago, Illinois, et al., 561 U.S. 742, the Supreme Court 

said: ‘‘The Second Amendment protects the right to keep 

and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense, and we 

struck down a District of Columbia law that banned the 

possession of handguns in the home. . . . We have previously held that most of the provisions of the Bill of 

Rights apply with full force to both the Federal Government and the States. Applying the standard that is well 

established in our law, we hold the Second Amendment 

right is fully applicable to the States.’’; and 

Whereas, in his majority opinion in District of Columbia v. 

Heller, Justice Scalia steadfastly defended Second 

Amendment rights, stating: ‘‘We start therefore with a 

strong presumption that the Second Amendment right is 

exercised individually and belongs to all Americans’’: 

Now, therefore, be it 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 656 IH 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House that the 

2 Senate should not confirm a nominee to the United States 

3 Supreme Court whose professional record or statements 

4 display opposition to the Second Amendment freedoms of 

5 law-abiding gun owners, including the fundamental, indi6 vidual right to keep and bear arms as affirmed in the Dis7 trict of Columbia et al. v. Heller and McDonald et al. v. 

8 City of Chicago, Illinois, et al. cases. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS