Supreme Court hears gun caseTuesday, the United States Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the McDonald v. Chicago Supreme Court case.
Otis McDonald, the named plaintiff in the case, has sued the city of Chicago over their 28-year-old ban on the sale and possession of handguns. Alan Gura, the attorney from 2008’s famous Heller Case, argued the case for Mr. McDonald.
The National Association for Gun Rights joined the fight and filed a “friend of the court” amicus brief on behalf of Mr. McDonald. (You can read the full amicus brief by clicking here.)
Alan Gura, in response to questions from Justice Sotomayor, summed up the case well when he said, “…States may have grown accustomed to violating the rights of American citizens, but that does not bootstrap those violations into something that is constitutional.” A full transcript of Tuesday's oral arguments is available online, by clicking here.
Now that the oral arguments have been heard, legal analysts believe a decision could be handed down by mid-summer.
In theory, if Chicago’s handgun ban is indeed overturned, it would open the door to additional lawsuits against cities, municipalities and potentially even states that ban entire classes of weapons.
In practice, this ruling will likely have very little effect on the day-to-day lives of most gun owners. If the Heller Decision taught us anything, even a ruling in our favor doesn’t mean that gun control advocates won’t work tirelessly to restrict our rights.
After the Heller decision, D.C. passed draconian restrictions on firearms possession, and still bans the entire class of semi-auto handguns. I fully expect Chicago to follow suit, by passing a host of restrictions and regulations on the right of Chicago’s residents to defend themselves with handguns.
It does, however, mean that gun owners can make a role for themselves in the process. By being involved in state and local elections, gun owners have a direct impact on the politicians and the legislation they pass.
Now is not the time to sit on the sidelines. Gun owners must be involved in the political process to affect real, Constitutional change.
(For a refresher on the McDonald case, the Associated Press has a good write up on the plaintiffs in the case; David and Colleen Lawson, Otis McDonald and Adam Orlov.)
To view this email as a web page, please click this link: view online.
Help fight gun control. Donate to the National Association for Gun Rights!
Thursday, March 4, 2010
Supreme Court hears gun case
Posted by David Ben-Ariel at 10:54 AM