U.S. Supreme Court Rules Chicago Gun Ban is Unconstitutional

U.S. Supreme Court Monday struck down Chicago’s ban on private ownership of handguns, saying the Second Amendment applies to states and municipalities as well as the federal government.
The high court extended its 2008 ruling in Heller vs. United States, which allowed residents in Washington, a federal enclave, to have guns for self-defense in their homes.

.

U.S. Supreme Court Rules Chicago Gun Ban is Unconstitutional
The U.S. Supreme Court has upheld the right to “keep and bear arms” in a decision announced to day to reverse the Chicago gun ban. In making this ruling, the court is essentially making it clear that the right to “keep and bear arms” applies to gun control laws at the local and state level as well as the federal.:

Supreme Court Opinion: Two years ago, in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. ___, this Court held that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense and struck down a District of Columbia law that banned the possession of handguns in the home. Chicago (hereinafter City) and the village of Oak Park, a Chicago suburb, have laws effectively banning handgun possession by almost all private citizens. After Heller, petitioners filed this federal suit against the City, which was consolidated with two related actions, alleging that the City’s handgun ban has left them vulnerable to criminals. They sought a declaration that the ban and several re-lated City ordinances violate the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. Rejecting petitioners’ argument that the ordinances are un-constitutional, the court noted that the Seventh Circuit previously had upheld the constitutionality of a handgun ban, that Heller had explicitly refrained from opining on whether the Second Amendment applied to the States, and that the court had a duty to follow established Circuit precedent. The Seventh Circuit affirmed, relying on three 19th-century cases—United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542, Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252, and Miller v. Texas, 153 U. S. 535— which were decided in the wake of this Court’s interpretation of the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause in the Slaughter-House Cases, 16 Wall. 36.

Held: The judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded……. FULL OPINION ( PDF )

.

Brit Hume explaining liberal hatred of gun rights

.

Wild Thing’s comment……..
Thank God five Supreme Court justices saw fit to, you know, respect that part of the Constitution.
They ALL should have but thank God for the five at least.