Quote:
Quote by: gallo  That's actually correct as I understand it. Washington, D.C. is special. The Court could possibly strike down/uphold the D.C. gun laws and at the same time limit the effect of that opinion to D.C. alone. This case has come from federal courts without any consideration in any state court. However, if a case from the jurisdiction of a state is cited, Miller (307 U.S. 174) for example, then argument could be made that the opinion applied to all levels of government in all states.
Of course, the Court might decide that while a total ban on firearms is a violation of the 2nd Amendment, reasonable restrictions on the possession and carrying of them is not. They will have to be very careful in how they word their decision in that case. For example, what are "reasonable restrictions"? |
I'd also be curious as to how the Court will attempt to define "arms", as that will indicate whether or not those ruling are hostile to the concept, or not.