Also in this playlist...
This transcript is automatically generated
Showed you last hour how President Obama today sat down -- law enforcement officers from three communities rocked by recent mass shootings.
Obama meeting with police chiefs from more than a dozen communities including -- Colorado.
Oak Creek Wisconsin in Newtown Connecticut.
Asking them to help him in his efforts to convince congress to pass gun control legislation.
But there are new concerns that the president may be deploying other tactics to get what he wants.
Including federal agencies.
To push his anti assault weapons agenda.
This just days after we learned that his former chief of staff now Chicago mayor Rahm Emanuel.
May be getting.
Some federal help in his effort to pressure private banks that do business with America's gun industry.
Two big banks Bank of America TD bank directly and pressuring them not to do business.
With some of our largest gun manufacturers here's my question for you.
You've got a public official.
Interfering with private contractual rights between these entities.
Who writes that a protected by the Second Amendment by the way and and targeted -- First Amendment and their viewpoints on gun control.
Is that legal.
But I don't think so I think number one.
The mayor needs to be careful but it -- engaged in tortuous interference with business it's one thing.
If you're the mayor of Chicago and you say you know what our retirement funds for Chicago employees will not be invested.
In the manufacturers of bug -- that's one thing you can make that decision.
But to interfere with the contractual relationship between.
A Bank of America or any other bank -- for that matter and a manufacturer.
Of and I don't hear guns that are protected by the Second Amendment and to interfere with their contractual relationship their funding.
Other looks like -- -- -- -- business I mean this is busy calling for a boycott.
That's one thing and again that would raise serious issues but here he's actually saying don't keep those business relationships going.
The police period not that Chicago won't do business with.
Other pension funds investing that they can make that decision Chicago can make that decision we're not gonna invest in this particular enterprise but to tell the private bank of those businesses that you're gonna you know we want to stop doing business.
With those lawful business -- -- sorry -- an appearance with business and I think it could be a big problem for the mayor.
And it it's gonna backfire actually I think -- the reality is this could really hurt.
What -- toward their efforts are trying to do here because this is such a huge -- Lessening if the banks agree you know and so far we don't have -- reporting that we don't know what they're deciding this is just happening but.
If they agreed -- do it.
Then these gun manufacturers.
Will argue that they have been damaged.
And it was a direct result they'll say of the tortuous interference of the Chicago mayor but set apart from that jail and ask you because.
Rahm Emanuel got in trouble with.
EA CL UO I mean you CLU was not exactly known for defending the most conservative causes but.
But remember when he tried to stop chick filet from doing business in the city -- Kabul because its owners spoke out against gay marriage.
And the ACLU said -- -- mayor Emanuel.
That's viewpoint discrimination.
You're a public official official and you can't discriminate against a group like chick filet because of -- Beliefs held by check for ways owners.
Now he's -- he doesn't control the banks right now he can't say we're not doing business but isn't it -- a public official trying to extract a punishment.
On the gun manufacturers for their beliefs because what he's saying his.
You know need to get on board with the president's gun control proposals.
Not a sap manufacturing got -- you -- that support his proposals otherwise.
I'm -- try to cut off your banking access.
Yeah and he's doing this for members of third party going into interfere with this business relationship and Megan you brought the viewpoint discrimination.
Issue I actually argued that case of the Supreme Court of the United States in the early nineties and it was unanimous the liberal members of the court the most conservative.
All -- said.
Viewpoint discrimination is unconstitutional.
And that's exactly what's going on here.
Could you imagine if in the 1950s and sixties you know.
Those were opposed to civil rights tried this they -- if you do business with the black community we're going to not engage in your business we're gonna boycott your business that worked out very well for those.
Government leaders we're trying to do that and those were rights were protected by the constitution.
-- -- minority citizens our country for black Americans and the idea that you would take a constitutionally protected right and use it.
As its -- weapon if you will by saying if you do business with these companies banks.
Well -- you're gonna have a price to pay what they -- cut off the business related at the Chicago gonna threaten that we won't do business with these banks if they do business with the third party this is really dangerous stuff.
It's one thing we have a private citizen do it right he'll be one thing if this citizenry wrote to bank of Americans said.
We don't want you to do business many gun manufacturer until they get on board -- president Obama's proposed receipts.
But when you have an elected official you've got that governments basically coming in and strong -- somebody.
That raises it to another level does it not Jane it sets a precedents yes at the other side may be very unhappy with when there are different.
People in power.
And it may be different issues and we're talking about the Second Amendment today but it could be something else and this idea that the government would come in -- interfere with the third party relationship.
You've got two parties here.
You've got 43 with the government you've got the government Rahm Emanuel coming and telling the bank.
That's not his bank but the bank that is doing business with a protected activity.
Don't do business with him anymore because we don't like it.
You know I said they -- that -- fifties and sixties and it didn't work out too well for them so the fact of the matter is this whole idea that you can interfere with -- constitutional rights as white.
I'm sorry he's way over the line here I think he's creating tremendous legal liability and it's not helping the president's position at all well we'll see we'll see whether there -- -- of challenge and what the banks wind -- doing.
-- -- -- --
Filter by section