Texas shooting is new test for Joe Biden’s long battle over guns
Joe Biden, then the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, surveyed the collection of black, military-style rifles on display in the middle of the room as he denounced the sale of guns whose “only real function is to kill human beings at a ferocious pace.” That was nearly three decades ago, and Congress was on the verge of passing an assault weapons ban. But the law eventually expired, and guns that were once illegal are now readily available, most recently used in the slaughter at an elementary school in Uvalde, Texas. The tragedy, which came less than two weeks after another mass shooting at a grocery store in Buffalo, New York, has refocused Biden’s presidency on one of the greatest political challenges of his career — the long fight for gun control. Over the years, Biden has been intimately involved in the movement’s most notable successes, such as the 1994 assault weapons ban, and its most troubling disappointments, including the failure to pass new legislation after the 2012 massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. Now his White House, which was already trying to chip away at gun violence through executive orders, is organizing calls with activists and experts to plot a path forward. “He understands the history of the issue. He understands how the politics have shifted,” said Christian Heyne, vice president of policy at Brady, the gun control advocacy organization. “He feels a sense of missed opportunities from the past, and he understands that this is his last chance to have an impact on gun violence in America.” Even for a politician known for his passion, Biden’s reaction to the latest shooting in Texas has been searing. “Where’s the backbone, where’s the courage to stand up to a very powerful lobby?“ Biden said Wednesday as he called for Congress to pass new laws. Stef Feldman, a deputy assistant to the president, said the cascade of deaths — from Buffalo to Uvalde to everyday shootings that don’t generate nationwide headlines — only increases the urgency of the administration’s efforts. “Every story that we hear about individuals lost to gun violence provides more energy, more of a drive to continue the work,” she said. “If we can save even one life by pushing a little harder on a creative policy idea, it’s worth it.” But executive action — such as Biden’s order targeting ghost guns, which are privately made firearms without serial numbers — might be the best the White House can do if Republicans in the Senate remain opposed to new restrictions and Democrats are unwilling to circumvent filibusters. More challenges could come in the courts, and even the ghost gun rules may become tied up in litigation. “We’ve got to be clear,” said John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety. “This is the Senate’s job. It’s time for the Senate to actually step up and do something.” The first new try fell far short on Thursday. A measure to take up a domestic terrorism bill, which could have opened debate touching on guns, drew just 47 of the 60 votes needed to break a filibuster. It’s a far different situation than when Sen. Biden was working on gun legislation years ago. Fears about violent crime helped foster bipartisan compromises, and conservative rhetoric about gun ownership was less extreme. First, Congress passed the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act in 1993, requiring a background check when someone buys a gun from a federally licensed dealer. The measure was named for James Brady, the White House press secretary who was shot and wounded when John Hinckley Jr. attempted to assassinate President Ronald Reagan in 1981. Next, Congress approved the assault weapons ban as part of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act in 1994. The law outlawed specific guns, such as the AR-15 and restricted the type of military-style enhancements that firearms could have. However, the ban contained a sunset provision, and it was not renewed in 2004. Although the vast majority of shootings are committed with handguns, military-style semiautomatic rifles are staples of the country’s deadliest massacres. One of these weapons was used at Sandy Hook, where 26 people, including 20 children, were killed. The violence shocked the nation, and President Barack Obama asked Biden, then the vice president, to lead a new push for gun control. Sens. Joe Manchin, D-W.V., and Pat Toomey, R-Pa., crafted legislation that would have expanded background checks. In a speech less than three months after the shooting, Biden said “the excuse that it’s too politically risky to act is no longer acceptable.” He recalled successfully pushing for the assault weapons ban years earlier even though the National Rifle Association warned that he was going to be “taking your shotgun away.” “That kind of stuff doesn’t work anymore,” Biden added. But it did work, and the legislation failed in the U.S. Senate. Biden described the vote as a betrayal of families who lost children at Sandy Hook, saying, “I don’t know how anybody who looked them in the eye could have voted the way they did today.” Darrell A. H. Miller, a Duke University law professor who is an expert on the Second Amendment, said the political landscape had already changed. “It’s fair to say that the issue of guns has become even more polarized,” he said. “And the intensity of gun rights opposition to any kind of gun regulation of any description has become more inflexible.” Two years ago, guns became the leading cause of death among children and teenagers, outpacing car crashes. There are roughly 400 million guns in the country, more than one for every person. Military-style weapons are a staple of some Republican campaign advertisements. “The reality is, we’re not keeping up with the pace of the gun lobby to arm citizens,” said Fred Guttenberg, whose daughter was killed at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, in 2018. “It’s time to start asking,” Guttenberg said, “why are Republicans so diametrically opposed to doing whatever it takes to save lives?” There
Brett Kavanaugh: I didn’t recognize Parkland dad seeking handshake
Supreme Court nominee Brett Kavanaugh says he would have shaken the hand of a school shooting victim’s father during a break in last week’s Senate hearing had he recognized him before being whisked away by security detail. Kavanaugh’s explanation for the encounter with Fred Guttenberg— captured in an Associated Press photo that went viral on social media — was among a 263-page response to written questions from senators on a range of issues including abortion, executive power and his personal finances. Kavanaugh wrote that he assumed the man who approached him “and touched my arm” during a break at the Senate Judiciary Committee proceedings had been one of the many protesters in the hearing room. Guttenberg’s 14-year-old daughter, Jaime, was among 17 people killed on Feb. 14 at Stoneman Douglas High School in Florida. “It had been a chaotic morning,” Kavanaugh wrote. “I unfortunately did not realize that the man was the father of a shooting victim from Parkland, Florida. Mr. Guttenberg has suffered an incalculable loss. If I had known who he was, I would have shaken his hand, talked to him, and expressed my sympathy. And I would have listened to him.” Kavanaugh’s security detail ushered him out in a “split second,” according to the judge’s response to a written question from Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-Iowa, the chairman of the Judiciary Committee. It was among 1,287 questions from senators, almost all from Democrats. Pressed by Sen. Richard Blumenthal, D-Conn., if he had asked police to intervene, Kavanaugh wrote, “No.” The flood of new documents comes as the Judiciary Committee is set to meet Thursday to consider Kavanaugh’s confirmation, a vote that is expected to take place later this month. Democrats are fighting Kavanaugh’s nomination and decrying the process that Republicans used to compile his government records for review. Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., on Wednesday night released a new batch of committee confidential documents about Kavanaugh, repeating a tactic that could prompt a review from the Senate Ethics Committee. The 28 new “committee confidential” documents from Booker are from Kavanaugh’s time in the White House counsel’s office during the George W. Bush administration and show his involvement in judicial nominations, including for some of the more controversial judges of the era. Booker is being criticized by his GOP colleagues and outside groups for releasing the documents, which the Judiciary Committee is holding back on a confidential basis that makes them accessible only to senators. Last week, he released some documents that were later made public by the committee, but also others that weren’t. Wednesday’s disclosure brings the total to 75. Booker said the documents about Kavanaugh’s work “raise more serious and concerning questions” about his honesty during his testimony before the committee. The documents show Kavanaugh’s involvement in Bush’s nomination of Charles Pickering to an appellate court in the South amid questions about his views on race relations. Kavanaugh had indicated he was not substantially involved in the nomination. At the same time, the conservative group Judicial Watch delivered a letter Wednesday to the Senate Ethics Committee seeking an investigation. It says Booker violated Senate rules against disclosing confidential documents and could face Senate expulsion. Booker “explicitly invited his expulsion from the Senate in his egregious violation of the rules and contempt for the rule of law and the Constitution,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. At issue has been the unprecedented process the Senate Judiciary Committee used for gathering documents on Kavanaugh, an appellate court judge who is President Donald Trump‘s nominee to replace retired Justice Anthony Kennedy on the court. The Senate is expected to vote on his confirmation by the end of the month. The committee was hoping to quickly process Kavanaugh’s unusually long paper trail and relied on Bush’s lawyer, Bill Burck, to compile the documents, first estimated to be 900,000 pages from Kavanaugh’s time in the counsel’s office. Eventually, some 267,000 pages were made public and 174,000 were held as committee confidential. Democrats have complained the process was a “sham,” as Booker put it. It also excluded any documents Democrats wanted to see from Kavanaugh’s time as Bush’s staff secretary. But Burck’s team stood by the process, according to a letter to the committee Wednesday obtained by The Associated Press. They remain willing to review documents and consent to senators’ requests for disclosure, “when appropriate,” the letter said. Despite those commitments, the letter said one member of the committee has released more than 40 documents without consent, referring to Booker. “Had we been consulted on these universally released documents, we would have consented to their public disclosure,” the letter said. White House spokesman Raj Shah said, “Despite the endless complaints from critics, the committee has received more material regarding Judge Kavanaugh’s nomination than any nominee in history.” He said senators have “more than enough information” to consider Kavanaugh’s nomination. Republished with permission from the Associated Press.
