Kavanaugh Defends Opinion That Assault Weapons Are “Common” and Can’t Be Banned

Watch his testy exchange with a Democratic senator on his controversial position.

Chip Somodevilla/Getty

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

In 2011, Brett Kavanaugh wrote a dissent in a case in which he argued that the District of Columbia’s ban on assault weapons was unconstitutional. “A ban on a class of arms is not an ‘incidental’ regulation,” he wrote. “It is equivalent to a ban on a category of speech.” No other court has agreed with Kavanaugh on this front, and other appeals courts have upheld reasonable limits on gun ownership.

On Wednesday, the second day of Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing to join the Supreme Court, this dissent was front and center as he faced sharp questioning from the Senate Judiciary Committee. 

Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) grilled the nominee about his view that assault weapons couldn’t be regulated, asking what evidence he used to justify his position that assault weapons were “in common use” and thus their ownership was protected by the Second Amendment. 

Kavanaugh dodged the question, saying, “Machine guns can be prohibited.” Feinstein responded, “I think we’re on totally different wavelengths.” She noted that machine guns had long been prohibited and went on to press him on assault weapons, highlighting their use in multiple school shootings in recent years. Feinstein wanted to know what evidence or research he’d drawn on to support his assertion that assault weapons were “common.” Kavanaugh insisted that “millions and millions” of assault weapons were owned in the United States, to which Feinstein replied, “You’re saying numbers define common use?” She expressed skepticism that an assault weapon was something lots of ordinary Americans toted around on a daily basis.

Kavanaugh claimed sympathy to the problem of gun violence, noting that he’d grown up around Washington, DC, which was once known as the murder capital of America. None of that changed his views on gun regulation, though. “This is all about precedent for me,” Kavanaugh told Feinstein, citing the Supreme Court’s 2008 majority opinion in District of Columbia v. Heller, authored by the late Justice Antonin Scalia, which overturned the District’s ban on handguns and firmly established an individual right to own guns. Watch the entire exchange here:

Kavanaugh kicked off the second day of his confirmation hearing amid loud and angry protests from the public, whose noisy objection to his nomination drowned out most of his answers from Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), the committee chairman. But most of the protesters had been removed from the room by the time Feinstein launched into her interrogation.

GREAT JOURNALISM, SLOW FUNDRAISING

Our team has been on fire lately—publishing sweeping, one-of-a-kind investigations, ambitious, groundbreaking projects, and even releasing “the holy shit documentary of the year.” And that’s on top of protecting free and fair elections and standing up to bullies and BS when others in the media don’t.

Yet, we just came up pretty short on our first big fundraising campaign since Mother Jones and the Center for Investigative Reporting joined forces.

So, two things:

1) If you value the journalism we do but haven’t pitched in over the last few months, please consider doing so now—we urgently need a lot of help to make up for lost ground.

2) If you’re not ready to donate but you’re interested enough in our work to be reading this, please consider signing up for our free Mother Jones Daily newsletter to get to know us and our reporting better. Maybe once you do, you’ll see it’s something worth supporting.

payment methods

GREAT JOURNALISM, SLOW FUNDRAISING

Our team has been on fire lately—publishing sweeping, one-of-a-kind investigations, ambitious, groundbreaking projects, and even releasing “the holy shit documentary of the year.” And that’s on top of protecting free and fair elections and standing up to bullies and BS when others in the media don’t.

Yet, we just came up pretty short on our first big fundraising campaign since Mother Jones and the Center for Investigative Reporting joined forces.

So, two things:

1) If you value the journalism we do but haven’t pitched in over the last few months, please consider doing so now—we urgently need a lot of help to make up for lost ground.

2) If you’re not ready to donate but you’re interested enough in our work to be reading this, please consider signing up for our free Mother Jones Daily newsletter to get to know us and our reporting better. Maybe once you do, you’ll see it’s something worth supporting.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate