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 second ruling confirms that the same standard applies to states and cities. 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.”
Supreme Court leaves door open for gun legislation
Legislation that limits the ownership of handguns could nevertheless, under some situations, be considered constitutional. 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 nevertheless limit gun ownership. The right to own guns, though, may nevertheless supersede the right of the government to limit that ownership.
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 SCOTUS declared the Public Business Accounting Board is unconstitutional in its current incarnation. 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 can be constitutional. In Bilski v. Kappos, the court ruled that a patent cannot be taken out on financial risk limiting strategies.
