SCOTUS To Hear Landmark Gun Rights Case

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) will hear a case next week that could decide whether the Second Amendment means ordinary Americans have the right to keep and bear arms.

Not confused, are you? I know, I can hear you out there right now saying that THAT question was answered during the 2008 DC v Heller case. Actually, though the decision in Heller DID say that the Second Amendment conferred an individual right, it applied that decision only to "federal envclaves" such as Washington DC. Left unaddressed was whether or not the same right is binding on states.

Let's review. When the bill of rights was originally passed, it applied only to federal laws and areas. But then came the 14th amendment... you remember that one, surely? The relevant portion of that amendment is section 1.

Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside. No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any State deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.

This section introduces the idea of "privileges and immunities of citizens of the United States." Now, what could those be? If you answered the protections included in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, you'd be right. The 14th amendment changed the game, as courts quickly began to realize and rule accordingly, inasmuch as states would no longer be allowed to pass laws that infringed on our Constitutional rights.

The first right so addressed was the right of free speech... right, that's the First Amendment. And gradually over the years, one right after another was "incorporated" into the 14th amendment. But so far, the Second Amendment has not been so incorporated.

And now that SCOTUS has ruled that the Second Amendment does, in fact, refer to an individual right, whether or not states must honor that right becomes a very important issue. After all, what good is a "constitutional right" that any state can ignore and pass a law against?


You see, Chicago does not allow the possession of handguns by private citizens in their own homes. They passed that law in 1982. Mr. Otis McDonald lives in a very bad neighborhood, and wants a gun for self-protection... he is suing the city for violation of his Second Amendment rights. Both the lower court and the appeals court ruled against him, and SCOTUS has agreed to hear the case.

You can view the case summary here.

This could easily be the most significant case they hear this year, and the court will hear oral arguments this coming Tuesday, March 2.

Make no mistake, this is a pivotal decision... if they rule against McDonald, it means that the Second Amendment is a 2nd-class Constitutional right. Such a ruling would mean the Second Amendment is a right in name only, because in reality any state could pass a law disarming every citizen.

So this is a case to watch, and I'll be mentioning it as the year progresses.