Paul Clement resigned today from his post as solicitor general, effective June 2, the Justice Department has announced.
Mr. Clement, 41, is regarded by many as one of the brightest young stars of the conservative legal firmament, and argued 49 cases before the Supreme Court for the Bush administration.
But some in the White House, particularly Vice President Cheney, were not happy with Mr. Clement's arguments in D.C. v. Heller, the gun rights case heard by the court in March.
Mr. Clement argued that the second amendment allows individuals to bear arms, but he also allowed some room in his interpretation of the second amendment for the control of firearms by the government.
The solicitor general asked that a 2007 Court of Appeals ruling be returned to the D.C. Circuit because its assertion of an individual right to bear arms was too broad.
Mr. Cheney wanted the court to rule that there should be no government control over firearm ownership and use, and signed his name to an amicus brief arguing so.
-----
Correction — Reader Jeff Showell e-mailed me and rightly pointed out that the last sentence above was incorrect.
"I believe that the brief asked that 'strict scrutiny' be the standard of review for gun laws, but did not say what you wrote. I cannot imagine any sane politician stating that there should be no government control at all over guns," Mr. Showell wrote.
Belatedly, here is the link to the brief signed by Mr. Cheney.
Stephen P. Halbrook, the attorney who filed the brief on behalf of Mr. Cheney, 55 senators and 250 House members, wrote that "a holding by this Court that the District's pistol ban violates the Second Amendment would not apply to such firearms which are restricted under other categories."
"This case involves nothing more than the right of law-abiding persons to keep common handguns and usable firearms for lawful self-defense in the home," the brief says.
— Jon Ward, White House correspondent, The Washington Times
Comments (4)
Unfortunately, Clement did not bail soon enough.
Just this week, he kicked in the teeth ONCE AGAIN the cause of employees laboring under the yoke of compulsory unionism. It happened in a pending U.S. Supreme Court case brought by the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation involving Maine state employees ordered to pay union dues or be fired from their jobs.
And Clement did it last year as well in another of our cases, adopting and arguing the wrongheaded position of the AFL-CIO.
With "friends" like Clement, who needs enemies?
For more information, click here: http://www.nrtw.org/blog/bushs-top-lawyer-taking-orders-big-labor
Stefan Gleason
Vice President
National Right to Work
Legal Defense Foundation
Posted by Stefan Gleason | May 14, 2008 9:02 PM
Thankfully, albeit too late, Clement is gone. He, like most Washington Republicans today, has forgotten, or chosen to ignore, that to be a conservative requires one to have, hold and support time-honored principles. Among these are that the Constitution means what it says and that government works best when it encumbers the American people least.
It is unfortunate that it will take a defeat of epic proportion in November to hopefully bring us back to these realizations.
Posted by JHunter | May 15, 2008 8:42 AM
Paul Clement Don't let the door hit you on the way out. Good riddance
Posted by Melodyl | May 15, 2008 8:01 PM
"One of the brightest young stars of the conservative legal firmament?" Who are you kidding!?! If he's a conservative then we need a major overhaul on the definition of conservative.
Posted by RA Johnson | May 16, 2008 11:36 AM