The US Supreme Court released their decision on this landmark case today, applying the 2nd Amendment to States and cities. The doors of case law have effectively been opened for waves of new litigation against excessive regional “gun control”. Here are some excerpts from the case docket…
“Chicago enacted its handgun ban to protect its residents “from the loss of property and injury or death from firearms.” See Chicago, Ill., Journal of Proceedings of the City Council, p. 10049 (Mar. 19, 1982). The Chicago petitioners and their amici, however, argue that the handgun ban has left them vulnerable to criminals. Chicago Police Department statistics, we are told, reveal that the City’s handgun murder rate has actually increased since the ban was enacted, and that Chicago residents now face one of the highest murder rates in the country and rates of other violent crimes that exceed the average in comparable cities.”
“In Heller, we held that the Second Amendment protects the right to possess a handgun in the home for the purpose of self-defense. Unless considerations of stare decisis counsel otherwise, a provision of the Bill of Rights that protects a right that is fundamental from an American perspective applies equally to the Federal Government and the States.”
“The provision at issue in this case, §1 of the Fourteenth Amendment, provides, among other things, that a State may not abridge “the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States” or deprive “any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.”
The majority opinion describes in-depth the historical upbringings of “gun control” and it’s discriminatory and racist roots. Of the dissenters, Justice Stevens felt that this decision would undermine a vast portion of past decisions, and Justice Breyer had apparently been living on Mars when he concluded that “there is no popular consensus that the right is fundamental”. Ironically, these two judges were born in two of the most anti-gun cities in America; Chicago and San Francisco respectively.
Here is a link to the case docket from which the quotes were derived.