The constitutionality of gun control laws have been clarified by the Supreme Court. To a point, the ban on ownership of handguns has been struck down. In 2008, the Supreme Court struck down a law banning handguns in Washington D.C. – and McDonald v. Chicago clarifies that ruling.
The Supreme Court gun decision
Within the last three years, the Supreme Court has rendered two decisions on the constitutionality of gun bans. Handguns cannot be restricted on ownership, as outlined by the decision rendered in McDonald v. Chicago. A few years ago, the Supreme Court gun ruling indicated that Washington D.C., a federal district, could not ban handgun ownership. This gun ruling clarified that the same standard applies to cities and states. The 5-4 majority ruling stated that that “self-defense is a basic right… individual self-defense is ‘the central component’ of the Second Amendment.”
Not all gun legislation disallowed
While the Supreme court gun decision does make handgun bans unconstitutional, it leaves the door open for further legislation and litigation. The majority opinion restates the 2008 caveat that “recognized 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 still limit gun ownership. The right to own guns, though, might still supersede the right of the government to limit that ownership.
The other things the court ruled on today
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 that 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. If the SEC gets more control over the board, though, it could be constitutional. In Bilski v. Kappos, the court ruled that a patent cannot be taken out on financial risk limiting strategies.
