District of Columbia v. Heller
District of Columbia v. Heller was a landmark case decided by the United States Supreme Court on June 26, 2008. This case was pivotal in interpreting the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, which states:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Background and Facts
- Plaintiff: Dick Anthony Heller, a special police officer in Washington, D.C., who was licensed to carry a handgun while on duty but was prohibited from doing so at home under D.C. law.
- Defendant: The District of Columbia, which had some of the nation's strictest gun control laws at the time, including a ban on handguns.
- Laws Challenged: The case focused on D.C.'s Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975, which:
- Banned the registration of handguns.
- Required that all firearms in a home be kept unloaded and either disassembled or trigger-locked.
Legal Issues
The primary issue before the Court was whether the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess firearms for traditionally lawful purposes such as self-defense within the home.
Court's Decision
- Opinion: Justice Antonin Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court, with a 5–4 majority, stating that the Second Amendment indeed confers an individual right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense, not contingent upon service in a militia.
- Key Points:
- The prefatory clause of the Second Amendment does not limit or expand the scope of the operative clause.
- The right to bear arms is not unlimited, and certain longstanding prohibitions and restrictions are permissible (e.g., carrying dangerous and unusual weapons, possessing firearms in sensitive places like schools or government buildings).
- The handgun ban and the requirement that firearms be kept inoperable were deemed unconstitutional as they made it impossible for citizens to use arms for self-defense.
Impact
The decision in District of Columbia v. Heller had significant implications:
- It was the first time the Supreme Court explicitly recognized an individual right to bear arms unconnected with service in a militia.
- It invalidated similar handgun bans in other jurisdictions and influenced subsequent gun legislation and court decisions.
- However, it left many questions unanswered, particularly regarding the scope of permissible regulation of firearms.
Subsequent Developments
Following Heller, the Supreme Court addressed related issues in McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), which applied the Second Amendment to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause.
External Links