EUGENE VOLOKH TAKES ON an egregious example of post-9/11 discrimination against non-citizens:

“All persons,” the Nebraska Constitution says, “have certain inherent and inalienable rights,” including “the right to keep and bear arms for security or defense of self, family, home, and others, and for lawful common defense, hunting, recreational use, and all other lawful purposes.” Voters enacted this right to bear arms in 1988 and made clear that the right “shall not be denied or infringed by the state or any subdivision thereof.”

And yet the City Council is now considering re-enacting its law banning anyone who is “not a citizen of the United States” from owning a handgun. Law-abiding Omaha residents – adults who have shown no sign of posing a danger to others – would thus be denied their clearly established constitutional right.

What justification can there be for this? After all, non-citizens are surely included in “all persons.” And surely law-abiding non-citizens need to defend themselves, their families and their homes just as much as you and I do. Denying non-citizens this right because a few non-citizens may abuse it is wrong – just as wrong as denying citizens the right to bear arms because a few citizens abuse it. . . .

Since Sept. 11, we’ve heard many complaints about supposed oppression of immigrants; and many of these have proved unfounded. For instance, of course the government may lock up non-citizens who have overstayed their visas – that’s just enforcing the law.

But this city ordinance really is oppression: The government would deny to law-abiding non-citizens a clearly defined constitutional right.

Where’s the ACLU on this one?