Texas Senator and Tea Party spokesman Ted Cruz has been caught in a huge contradiction regarding the Constitution and the proposed assault weapons ban bill, according to the blog People for the American Way.

Cruz, who is now infamous for his failed attempt at lecturing Senator Dianne Feinstein yesterday about the Constitution and the Second Amendment during the Senate Judiciary Committee's consideration of the assault weapons ban bill, asserted his knowledge on the subject as the submitter of an "amicus brief" representing 31 states in the Supreme Court's Heller case. During the hearing Cruz clearly states that the Supreme Court's District of Columbia v. Heller decision absolutely prohibits the proposed federal ban on assault weapons.

In the original brief, however, Cruz clearly claimed that a favorable ruling in the case would not undermine the constitutionality of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban. The ban, which was one of the regulations discussed in the brief submitted by the U.S., expired in 2004 and included many of the weapons in the current bill. Cruz's brief said that "none of the federal firearms regulations discussed in the United States' brief is jeopardized by the Court of Appeals' decision."

Here's an excerpt from Cruz's brief:

"Indeed, it bears emphasis that amici States likewise have a strong interest in maintaining the many state laws prohibiting felons in possession, restricting machine guns and sawed-off shotguns, and the like...But all 31 amici States agree that striking down the District of Columbia's categorical ban on all operative firearms would pose no threat to these reasonable regulations."

During yesterday's hearing Cruz shared his appendix with the Justices where he listed the state laws he regarded as "reasonable" and those that would not be threatened by the ruling they ultimately made. Among them are bans on assault weapons in Connecticut, Massachusetts, and New York.

[Sen. Ted Cruz via RawStory.com]