General Categories > Newsworthy

Supreme Court Update: McDonald v. City of Chicago

(1/1)

Dan W:
Supreme Court Update: McDonald v. City of Chicago

http://www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=5285
 
Friday, January 08, 2010
 

For several months, we have been reporting on the landmark McDonald v. City of Chicago court case.  The McDonald case is one of several that were filed immediately after last year's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the Court upheld the Second Amendment as protecting an individual right and invalidated Washington, D.C.'s ban on handgun possession, as well as the capital city's ban on keeping loaded, operable firearms for self-defense in the home.

On November 16, the NRA filed its brief with the U.S. Supreme Court as Respondent in Support of Petitioner in McDonald v. City of Chicago.  The NRA brief asks the Court to hold that the Second Amendment applies to state and local governments through the 14th Amendment, and makes a clear and strong case in favor of incorporation of the Second Amendment.

The Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments in the McDonald v. City of Chicago case on Tuesday, March 2, 2010.

There are two provisions in the 14th Amendment to the Constitution through which the Supreme Court should apply the Second Amendment to the states.  One is the Due Process Clause, which the Court has used to incorporate a majority of the provisions of the Bill of Rights, and the other is the Privileges or Immunities Clause.  The Supreme Court has asked the parties in McDonald v. Chicago to address both issues.   Counsel for the petitioner, Otis McDonald, focused overwhelmingly in his brief on the Privileges or Immunities Clause.  NRA, as a party to the case, focused its brief largely on the Due Process Clause (although the NRA brief also discusses the Privileges or Immunities Clause).

NRA believes that the Court should reach the same conclusion that the Framers of the 14th Amendment clearly intended to apply the Second Amendment to the states under either provision of the 14th Amendment.  NRA has asked for the opportunity to participate in the oral argument to ensure that all arguments for applying the Second Amendment to the states are fully considered.  Gun owners will have the best chance of ultimate victory on this critical issue if all options are fully explained to the Court.  As always, NRA's goal in McDonald is to see that our fundamental, individual Right to Keep and Bear Arms applies to all law-abiding Americans, regardless of the state in which they live.
Rest assured we will continue to update you on the case as it progresses.
   
 

 
Copyright 2010, National Rifle Association of America, Institute for Legislative Action.
This may be reproduced. It may not be reproduced for commercial purposes.
11250 Waples Mill Road, Fairfax, VA 22030    800-392-8683
Contact Us | Privacy & Security Policy

Dtrain323i:
I met Mr. McDonald at a 2nd Amendment Rally in Downtown Chicago in 2007. He's a kind older gentleman who lives in the city and had his home broken into IIRC. If he lived pretty much anywhere in IL he would have been able to use force to defend his home but because he lives within the city limits, it is illegal for him to own a handgun.

DanClrk51:
I hope Chicago gets their behind handed to them. I also hope the Supreme Court grows some balls and declares several restrictive gun laws (registration, bans on open carry, magazine limits, assault weapon bans) unconstitutional as well.

Navigation

[0] Message Index