America’s Gun Violence Problem Won’t be Solved by Judges
Author: Elizabeth Cerceo, MD, FACP, FHM
Keywords: gun violence, legislation, advocacy, judicial process
In a reckless decision made by a conservative majority, the Supreme Court struck down a New York state law that restricted carrying guns in public. While the justices are throwing about esoteric debates and agonizing over semantics, I am caring for a young man today who was left quadriplegic by a gunshot wound. My colleagues have cared for victims of mass shootings. Hospital violence is rising with violence in Tulsa, OK. Mental health across the country has suffered. However, these justices prioritize giving everyone a gun to walk around with.
The institution of the courts seems to walk both sides of the fence, both encouraging widespread gun use and ownership and simultaneously historically enacting harsh penalties on those who use the weapons, leading the US to have more incarcerated citizens than any other country. The US contains only 5% of the global population but houses 25% of the prisoners worldwide. The US murder rate is 25 times higher than comparable high income countries. This dichotomy begs the question of whether the justices consider these cases in a vacuum, completely divorced from the reality around them.
These conservative judges do not take care of patients. They do not personally deal with the ramifications of the theoretical decisions they pass down from a bench far removed from the American people. While physicians have been accused of not staying in our lane when it comes to gun regulation, I would like to turn the tables. There is no one better suited to weigh in on the gun debate than doctors doctors. The scourge of gun violence is a public health crisis.
On the other hand, judges who consider a ruling in the absence of its implications are acting without regard to the health and wellbeing of the Americans this institution was created to protect. The judges consider the right to live a life without being gunned down as a lesser good than being able to carry a gun in public. This reasoning seems fatally flawed.
Their reasoning is, by their own admission, predicated on a historical interpretation of the Second Amendment but we have a gun violence problem today, not colonial invaders. We are not talking about bayonets and crossbows but rather concealed handguns in busy shopping malls and in subway stations. The conservative justices refuse to acknowledge the ills of our current society and have weakened the institution they represent.
That the American people are subject to the whims of these unelected officials is unconscionable. While the branch of government is meant to be part of a system of checks and balances, SCOTUS has been embracing ever more far-reaching legislation with potentially severely negative consequences without hindrance. Where are the checks and balances for decisions which may go against the public good or at the very least public opinion? We did not vote for these justices who are in place. We had no say in the individuals who now hold sway over the outcomes for many and who will be ensconced on that bench for years to come. Even many conservatives in favor of gun protections question the wisdom of promoting a gun on every hip in every restaurant, library, grocery store, and hospital.
Certainly, the Senate passage of a bipartisan gun safety bill may act to counter some of the harm incurred. Perhaps states such as NJ will scramble to come up with legislation to work around the Supreme Court decision. While they do, America’s gun violence problem will continue to worsen. Doctors, nurses, and other health professionals will deal with the consequences first hand while the Supreme Court debates historical context.
About the Author: Elizabeth Cerceo, MD, FACP, FHM is a hospitalist and Associate Professor of Medicine at the Cooper University Hospital/Cooper Medical School of Rowan University. Her interests include climate change and health, gun violence, medical education, and the humanities.
