The constitutionality of gun control laws are clarified by the Supreme Court. To a point, the ban on ownership of handguns has been struck down. For one of the most part, McDonald v. Chicago clarifies the 2008 decision striking down a Washington D.C. law.
Post resource: Supreme Court Rules on gun control in Second Amendment case by Personal Money Store
SCOTUS rules on gun ownership
In the last 3 years, the Supreme Court has rendered two decisions on the constitutionality of gun bans. One of the most recent case, McDonald v. Chicago, challenged the ability of Chicago to ban handguns. In 2008, the SCOTUS ruled that federal districts could not ban handgun ownership. This second ruling confirms that the very same standard applies to states and cities. Writing for the 5-4 majority, justice Samuel Alito stated that “self-defense is a basic right… individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment.”
Some gun legislation could be allowed
Legislation that limits the ownership of handguns could nevertheless, under some situations, be considered constitutional. The majority opinion restates the 2008 caveat that “recognized that the right to keep and bear arms is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” To put it simply, governments can nevertheless limit gun ownership. Where exactly that right butts up against the Second Amendment is nevertheless to be determined.
Other Supreme Court decisions
On the last day of Justice John Paul Stevens’ 34-year service on the court, the Supreme Court rendered decisions on more than just guns. The Court declared the Public Company Accounting Board, as it was created, is unconstitutional. In 2002, this board was re-created to respond to the failure of Enron. The board could be made constitutional if the Securities and Exchange Commission gets more control over the board. Strategies for limiting risk can’t be patented, according to the decision in Bilski v. Kappos.
No comments:
Post a Comment