Oral arguments are being held today before the U.S. Supreme Court in the truly landmark DC v Heller case about the meaning of Second Amendment rights. My Independence Institute and blogging colleague – and writing mentor – David Kopel is sitting with the plaintiffs today as the case is made for gun ownership as a Constitutionally-recognized individual right. You can visit David’s website to find a copy of the Institute’s amicus brief filed with the high court.
For a quick and insightful summary of what DC v Heller is (and isn’t) about, read Prof. Randy Barnett’s column in today’s Wall Street Journal. Also, for more relevant facts and opinions on the revolutionary Second Amendment case than you can possibly absorb, head over to the Volokh Conspiracy and scan the page to follow the ongoing debate among legal scholars – including our own David Kopel.
This ruling will be one to watch closely. As Barnett concludes in his column:
But although the implications of striking down the D.C. gun ban are limited, a decision upholding an unqualified individual right in Heller would still be a significant victory for individual rights and constitutionalism. To shrink from enforcing a clear mandate of the Constitution — as, sadly, the Supreme Court has often done in the past — would create a new precedent that would be far more dangerous to liberty than any weapon in the hands of a citizen.