The big story so far this week, and, for some, longer than that, is the Supreme Court’s decision yesterday to hear the District of Columbia’s handgun case, presumably to define the limits of the constitutional “right to keep & bear arms. It would mark the time the Court’s directly interpreted the Second Amendment. (Docket)
Up to now, lower courts have been following the premise set almost seventy years ago in U.S.v. Miller, rejecting arguments that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess firearms.
Georgetown University law professor Randy Barnett told USAToday that “It’s going to be the biggest case of the year. It’s going to be one of the rare instances that the court tells us what the meaning of the Constitution is, not the meaning of its prior cases. If the Court holds that the Second Amendment protects an individual right, it would be significant.”
But while the Court’s decision could change gun laws across the nation, “the consequences for gun owners will depend on how broadly the Court decides the case,” the article points out. “The justices could keep it focused on the federal enclave of Washington, D.C., and rule in such a way so as to not involve any state law, and, even if it does strike down the ban on handguns, it might not affect other, less restrictive laws across the country.”
District of Columbia Appeals Court case
Articles from CNN, and blog postings from Lyle Denniston (here) & (here), and Ohio State Univeresity’s Douglas Berman (here) have more input and commentary.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment