The constitutionality of gun control laws are clarified by the Supreme Court. This ruling does strike down laws that limit handgun ownership – to a point. For one of the most part, McDonald v. Chicago clarifies the 2008 decision striking down a Washington D.C. law.
SCOTUS rules on gun ownership
The recent decision about gun ownership is the second in the last 3 years. Handguns can’t be restricted on ownership, as outlined by the decision rendered in McDonald v. Chicago. In 2008, the SCOTUS ruled that federal districts could not ban handgun ownership. This gun ruling clarified the very same standard applies to cities and states. 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 legislation can nevertheless be constitutional
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 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 no matter what purpose.” To put it simply, governments can nevertheless limit gun ownership. The spot where the right to own guns supersedes the right of government to limit guns has nevertheless not been made clear.
Other rulings of the court
Today, the court handed down decisions far beyond just the Second Amendment. The Court declared that the Public Business 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. The court also rendered decisions in Bilski v. Kappos, which denied a patent for a strategy in hedging financial risk.
