Barack Obama ended the Washington guessing game by naming his replacement for Antonin Scalia’s seat on the Supreme Court.

And to no one’s surprise, his selection is a dangerous radical.

Just how dangerous is Merrick Garland?

He flat-out believes in national gun registration and gun bans.

In 2007, as a member of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, Judge Garland voted to reverse a D.C. Circuit decision striking down the District’s gun ban.

National Review reports:

But Garland has a long record, and, among other things, it leads to the conclusion that he would vote to reverse one of Justice Scalia’s most important opinions, D.C. vs. Heller, which affirmed that the Second Amendment confers an individual the right to keep and bear arms. Back in 2007, Judge Garland voted to undo a D.C. Circuit Court decision striking down one of the most restrictive gun laws in the nation.  

The liberal District of Columbia government had passed a ban on individual handgun possession, which even prohibited guns kept in one’s own house for self-defense. A three judge panel struck down the ban, but Judge Garland wanted to reconsider that ruling. He voted with Judge David Tatel, one of the most liberal judges on that court. As Dave Kopel observed at the time, “[t]he Tatel and Garland votes were no surprise, since they had earlier signaled their strong hostility to gun owner rights” in a previous case. Had Garland and Tatel won that vote, there’s a good chance that the Supreme Court wouldn’t have had a chance to protect the individual right to bear arms for several more years. 

In the D.C. vs. Heller case of 2008, Justice Scalia authored the landmark opinion that for the first time held that the Second Amendment conferred gun ownership as a fundamental right.

For decades, liberals have maintained the Second Amendment referred only to a well-regulated militia and that gun ownership was not a right to be enjoyed by everyday Americans.

Justice Scalia smashed that liberal delusion with his opinion in Heller.

Liberals have fumed since that decision because the opinion forbids outright gun bans, which is the left’s true gun policy.

By nominating the judge who Scalia directly overruled in Heller, Obama is firing a warning shot that one of his final acts as president will shift the ideological makeup of the Supreme Court to stack it in favor of upholding any gun control, including gun bans and confiscation.

If that was the extent of Garland’s record on the Second Amendment, it would be enough to justifiably terrify Americans.

However, Garland also believes in the left’s idea that justices are policy makers who can disregard the rule of law in order to achieve left-wing policy goals.

Garland is every bit as lawless a rogue as Obama.

National Review also reports:

Moreover, in the case mentioned earlier, Garland voted with Tatel to uphold an illegal Clinton-era regulation that created an improvised gun registration requirement. Congress prohibited federal gun registration mandates back in 1968, but as Kopel explained, the Clinton administration had been “retaining for six months the records of lawful gun buyers from the National Instant Check System.”

By storing these records, the federal government was creating an informal gun registry that violated the 1968 law. Worse still, the Clinton program even violated the 1994 law that had created the NICS in the first place. Congress directly forbade the government from retaining background check records for law-abiding citizens. 

Garland completely disregarded the plain text of the law, which banned federal gun registration.

The Clinton administration was trashing the rule of law by illegally storing the records of what guns buyers were purchasing from the National Instant Criminal Background Check System.

Background checks were not being used to keep guns out of the hands of dangerous criminals.

They were being used to track who was buying guys, what guns they were purchasing and how many they bought.

There is only one reason to store this information — so the government knows who owns what guns when they want to kick in your door and rip them from your hands.

Garland was perfectly fine with an illegal gun registration system because he doesn’t believe individuals should be allowed to own guns.

So in many ways, he is the perfect Obama nominee — a judge who believes the rule of law is a mere suggestion that liberals can simply disregard in pursuit of radical left-wing policy goals.