The Supreme Court agreed today to hear a challenge to Chicago’s ban on handguns. The Court will determine whether state and local gun-control ordinances violate the “right to keep and bear arms” clause in the 2nd Amendment. The case also will decide whether the 2nd Amendment protects a broad constitutional right, similar to the 1st Amendment’s right to free speech or the 4th Amendment’s protection against unreasonable searches and seizures.
Last year, in a 5-4 decision, the Court ruled that the Amendment protected an individual’s right to have a handgun at home for self-defense, striking down a local ban on handguns in the District of Columbia. But since D.C. is a federal district and not a state, the Court’s decision did not reconsider its 19th century rulings that the 2nd Amendment applied only to federal laws and federal restrictions.
In the mid-20th century, the Court decided that rights as the freedom of speech, the free exercise of religion and the freedom from “unreasonable searches” are part of the “liberty” protected by 14th Amendment. These rulings permit constitutional challenges to state and local laws banning or restricting the possession of firearms by individuals in cities.
Gun control advocates and lawyers for Chicago argue that easily concealed handguns pose a special danger in cities. “Homicides are most often committed with guns, especially handguns,” they told the Court, citing a Justice Department study. Lawyers for Chicago also said that while nearly all handguns are illegal, residents are permitted to have rifles or shotguns at home for self-defense.
Gun control opponents, however, argue that over-restrictive laws will do more harm than good by giving criminals an unfair advantage. They believe individuals without legal access to guns are the easy victims of criminals with guns.
The Supreme Court has said it will set arguments in the Chicago cases for January or February. The cases is McDonald vs. Chicago.