The Supreme Court has clarified their ruling on the constitutionality of gun control laws. The ruling strikes down many city and state bans on handguns, though it does leave the door open for carefully worded legislation that restricts gun ownership. The McDonald vs. Chicago decision is a clarification to last year’s striking down of the Washington D.C. handgun ban.
Gun ownership by the Supreme Court
The Supreme Court’s decision on gun ownership and also the Second Amendment is the second in the last few years. McDonald vs. Chicago challenged Chicago’s very restrictive ban on individuals owning handguns. In 2008, the SCOTUS ruled that federal districts could not ban handgun ownership. This second ruling confirms the exact 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 original 2008 ruling was repeated when the majority decision stated “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.” In other words, cities, states and also the federal government does nevertheless have the right to legislate and limit guns. The right to own guns, though, may nevertheless supersede the right of the government to limit that ownership.
Other rulings of the court
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 that the Public Company Accounting Board is unconstitutional in its current incarnation. This is a board that was intended in 2002 to audit public companies, in response to the failure of Enron and WorldCon. 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.
