The decision of Congressman Chris Jacobs of upstate New York to abandon his campaign for re-election to the House is an encouraging development. It suggests that at least one of our political parties — the Republicans — is prepared, even in the wake of terrible tragedies,  to stand by the Second Amendment that has been called the palladium of our liberty and that is a part of the Constitution to which all American legislators must be sworn.

We have nothing personal against Mr. Jacobs. He’s from a distinguished Republican family. His district encompasses the eastern suburbs of Buffalo, where on May 14 a racist gunman, using a Bushmaster semi-automatic rifle, killed 10 black persons. Following the massacre on May 24 at Uvalde Texas, in which another AR-15 type rifle was also used, Mr. Jacobs announced he was prepared to support a ban on such weapons.

It was a stunning reversal given that the topic was a matter of constitutional principle. Only two years ago, when Mr. Jacobs was first standing for Congress, he issued a press release announcing his endorsement by the National Rifle Association. He called it “truly an honor” and vowed “to uphold this commitment to protecting our rights, and Western New York gun owners can rest assured they have an ally and a fighter for them in Congress with me.”

No one favors the criminal use of any guns. All are horrified at the kinds of massacres that took place at Uvalde and Buffalo. Yet there is a serious constitutional dispute about what Congress is permitted to do under the Constitution. It seems to us that Mr. Jacobs’ fellow Republicans and the voters in the 27th District were entitled to take Mr. Jacobs’ boast at the outset of his congressional career as a sign that he had thought through his position.

Yet here Mr. Jacobs was suddenly forsaking his entire pledge. “I can’t in good conscience sit back and say I didn’t try to do something,” the congressman said, in coming out in favor of a ban on assault rifles. No wonder his party was quick to react. “It took only seven days for political forces to catch up with him,” is the way the New York Times reported the backlash against Mr. Jacobs’ betrayal of one of the foundational pledges of his campaign. 

The backlash, Mr. Jacobs said in an interview with the Buffalo News, “obviously arises” out of “my remarks, statements on being receptive to gun controls. And since that time, every Republican elected (official) that had endorsed me withdrew their endorsement. Party officials that supported me withdrew, most of them, and those that were going to said they would not. And so, obviously, this was not well received by the Republican base.”

Mr. Jacobs was quoted in the Times as maintaining that he supports the Second Amendment. He cited the thousands of gun permits he had issued as Erie County clerk, the Times said. Strikes us as a stretch. There are parts of New York state — such as the city — where the Second Amendment doesn’t apply. The right to keep and bear arms simply doesn’t exist in much of New York, and even before he recanted, Mr. Jacobs was AWOL from the fight.

As it happens, New Yorkers are currently before the United States Supreme Court in an effort to get the Second Amendment restored in the state. We have supported that effort from the get go. As early as 1911, when New York passed the Sullivan Act to block the Second Amendment in the state, the editors flying the flag of the Sun have been warning against the unintended consequences (such as what we now call the iron pipeline).

A decision from the Supreme Court is expected this month. We dasn’t predict what it will be. An effort by the Democrats to browbeat the court is under way. We favor a robust ruling requiring our governments to abide by the plain language of the Second Amendment, so that law-abiding persons are able to keep and bear arms in our cities and states. Only when that right is vouchsafed, in our view, will progress be possible in the debate over guns.