Supreme Court Shoots Down D.C. Gun Ban

5-4 Ruling Says Washington's 32-Year-Old Ban Incompatible With 2nd Amendment

(CBS/AP)  The Supreme Court ruled Thursday that Americans have a right to own guns for self-defense and hunting, the justices' first major pronouncement on gun rights in U.S. history.

The court's 5-4 ruling struck down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns as incompatible with gun rights under the Second Amendment. The decision went further than even the Bush administration wanted, but probably leaves most firearms laws intact.

The court had not conclusively interpreted the Second Amendment since its ratification in 1791. The amendment reads: "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

The basic issue for the justices was whether the amendment protects an individual's right to own guns no matter what, or whether that right is somehow tied to service in a state militia.

"Gun rights advocates now have a fully recognized individual right to bear arms. But gun control advocates now have a Supreme Court ruling that declares that this right, like other rights in the Constitution, is not absolute. So we finally get some clarity in an area of the law that was begging for it," writes CBS News chief legal analyst Andrew Cohen.

Writing for the majority, Justice Antonin Scalia said that an individual right to bear arms is supported by "the historical narrative" both before and after the Second Amendment was adopted.

The Constitution does not permit "the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home," Scalia said. The court also struck down Washington's requirement that firearms be equipped with trigger locks or kept disassembled, but left intact the licensing of guns.

In a dissent he summarized from the bench, Justice John Paul Stevens wrote that the majority "would have us believe that over 200 years ago, the Framers made a choice to limit the tools available to elected officials wishing to regulate civilian uses of weapons."

He said such evidence "is nowhere to be found."

Justice Stephen Breyer wrote a separate dissent in which he said, "In my view, there simply is no untouchable constitutional right guaranteed by the Second Amendment to keep loaded handguns in the house in crime-ridden urban areas."

Joining Scalia were Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Samuel Alito, Anthony Kennedy and Clarence Thomas. The other dissenters were Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and David Souter.

Gun rights supporters hailed the decision. "I consider this the opening salvo in a step-by-step process of providing relief for law-abiding Americans everywhere that have been deprived of this freedom," said Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association.

Cohen cautions that the ruling will not "immediately end all gun control regulation around the country. Jurisdictions that want to control guns - especially outside the home - still will be able to do so in some fashion."

---

Read Andrew Cohen's CourtWatch column on Thursday's ruling.

---

The NRA will file lawsuits in San Francisco, Chicago and several of its suburbs challenging handgun restrictions there based on Thursday's outcome.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein, D-Calif., a leading gun control advocate in Congress, criticized the ruling. "I believe the people of this great country will be less safe because of it," she said.

The capital's gun law was among the nation's strictest.

Dick Anthony Heller, 66, an armed security guard, sued the District after it rejected his application to keep a handgun at his home for protection in the same Capitol Hill neighborhood as the court.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia ruled in Heller's favor and struck down Washington's handgun ban, saying the Constitution guarantees Americans the right to own guns and that a total prohibition on handguns is not compatible with that right.

The issue caused a split within the Bush administration. Vice President Dick Cheney supported the appeals court ruling, but others in the administration feared it could lead to the undoing of other gun regulations, including a federal law restricting sales of machine guns. Other laws keep felons from buying guns and provide for an instant background check.

Scalia said nothing in Thursday's ruling should "cast doubt on long-standing prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons or the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings."

In a concluding paragraph to the his 64-page opinion, Scalia said the justices in the majority "are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this country" and believe the Constitution "leaves the District of Columbia a variety of tools for combating that problem, including some measures regulating handguns."

The law adopted by Washington's city council in 1976 bars residents from owning handguns unless they had one before the law took effect. Shotguns and rifles may be kept in homes, if they are registered, kept unloaded and either disassembled or equipped with trigger locks.

Opponents of the law have said it prevents residents from defending themselves. The Washington government says no one would be prosecuted for a gun law violation in cases of self-defense.

The last Supreme Court ruling on the topic came in 1939 in U.S. v. Miller, which involved a sawed-off shotgun. Constitutional scholars disagree over what that case means but agree it did not squarely answer the question of individual versus collective rights.

Forty-four state constitutions contain some form of gun rights, which are not affected by the court's consideration of Washington's restrictions.

The case is District of Columbia v. Heller, 07-290.

[libh8er]

The only people suffering thru this ban are the law abiding citizens. The criminals all have guns.

[joecoolswat]

We know already what the Supreme Court Liberal Activist Justices are going to rule, against Americans and for government, since Liberals believe that Government is the solution to all problems.....and that silly old constitution, that a living document, that has to "get with the times"

[samthetvcat]

I thought they had already ruled on this a while ago and struck it down - wasn''t that why Bloomberg was pushing people to call legislators? LOL - oh well, I guess it the ruling was no surprise . . . the Court doesn''t take cases of long-established law unless they''re going to change it . . .

[haoli25]

Better kill as many people as you can before they take your guns away. Posted by dragonwagon5



Sucks to be you, huh? lol I''m going to the gun range to practice today.

[faith_in_w]

THIS IS A VICTORY FOR JESUS! BLESSED ARE THE SIX SHOOTERS!

[cold777]

:( :( :( :( :(

[cold777]

smcoh326: Your low self-esteem just got a boost?

[shoebox119]

We know already what the Supreme Court Liberal Activist Justices are going to rule, against Americans and for government, since Liberals believe that Government is the solution to all problems.....and that silly old constitution, that a living document, that has to "get with the times."

Posted by JoeCoolSwat

________________________


Well, I see the gun nuts are out in force today after today''s Supreme Court ruling. Why some people like being armed to the teeth with weapons that are meant only to kill other human beings is beyond me.

Remember, JCS, that "silly old constitution" you make reference to is only a "********* piece of paper" to your Decider-in-Chief.

[mljohns00]

Finally. Too bad our Government officials regard our Constitution as a nuisance.

[marcpcbs]

Obviously the gun lobby is still paying off all the right people.

[cusefanjapan]

Back to the Wild West. Yeeee hawww!!!!! Shoot ''em up, boys. The usual American answer to all that plagues society...more weapons for everybody. I can see the crime rate just plummeting any moment now because all the criminals will be scared granny is packing. Hope Japan never comes up with "logic" like this.

[shoebox119]

Funny how just a few days ago the neocons were pissing and moaning about that "liberal" Supreme Court''s ruling on the Gitmo detainees'' rights.

Now look at them whooping and hollering at now being allowed to play Matt Dillon again. Idiots.. they have the attention span of a five-year-old.

[kindrox]

I guess even 5 of 9 supreme court justices can read *the people* and *shall not be infringed*.

[kennedy7955]

We wouldn''t need guns for self defense if our criminal justice system worked properly. The arrest the same criminals over and over again.

An example occurred just a couple weeks ago in Brigantine NJ. The police arrested a guy for breaking into a car. Shortly afterwards, he was charged and released. Again the police caught him breaking into another car. He was arrested, charged and yes, released again.

[drewclouse]

Bob Barr just released a statement expressing his opinions of the Heller Decision - calling it "One of Court''s most important rulings on behalf of liberty". See it at http://www.bobbarr2008.com/press

BobBarr2008 dot com

[cfin5]

Well, it could have been worse if the court would have sided with our cloaked liberal President. The correct reading could not be made any simpler with those little things called "COMMAS". The Founding Fathers weren''t confused as to why they penned what they did. Still want to hear more details about this ruling,....I don''t trust anyone in office anymore.

[lib_crusher]

I''''d really rather not live in a country where the government is listening in on my phone conversations and the only way to feel safe is to carry a gun.

Posted by dragonwagon5 at 10:30 AM : Jun 26, 2008

Don''t forget to write! Bon voyage!

[drewclouse]

Bob Barr just released a statement expressing his opinions of the Heller Decision - calling it "One of Court''s most important rulings on behalf of liberty". See it at http://www.bobbarr2008.com/press

BobBarr2008 dot com

[kindrox]

* feel safe is to carry a gun *

I don''t know about other people but my wife and I don''t carry to *feel* safe. I don''t have home, auto, or life insurance to *feel* safe either.

We carry guns and insurance policies because life is full of the unexpected.

[shoebox119]

I guess even 5 of 9 supreme court justices can read *the people* and *shall not be infringed*.

Posted by kindrox

_______________

And those same five obviously don''t seem to grasp the meaning of "a well regulated militia" either.

So, what''s your point?

[cusefanjapan]

Look at the headlines: "High Court spares lives of child rapists" "Supreme Court slashes Exxon Valdez damages" Supreme Court shoots down D.C. handgun ban" And you guys seriously think that Iran and Bin Laden are threats? You should be SERIOUSLY worried about the terror from within.

[lib_crusher]

For the government, by the delegates...

[luvny-2009]

WOW I just looked at this "Guns In America" it''s on this page under the pic of the flaged colored gun. Take a look at the South and the rates. I was amazed to find NY has one of the lowest death rates. NC is twice that and some in the South even higher. NC you can carry a gun without reason. Talk about cowboy up :-(

[beehive21-2009]

The People shall keep a gun or two in the home to protect the family from bullies and punks may still keep that right.DC ,is a Crime ridden toilet that should be made a state, whats with the no vote no representation place ? The Supreme Court got it right today.If you don''t like it ? leave.

[cfin5]

So, what''''s your point?

Posted by shoebox119 at 10:34 AM : Jun 26, 2008--- What a comma does to sentence structure,....that''s the point.

[mjm117]

DC had it wrong with an attempted ban. Focus needs to be on punishing those who use the guns in violent manners. You start locking up criminals up for life for attempted robberies with a gun, or life for the sale of an unregistered gun (or black market sales)...then we''ll start to see a safer world. You''ll never be able to remove guns from our streets...but we can sure work on removing the violent offenders

[one-american]

Liberals lose another battle in their War on America!

[mjm117]

Posted by linymo at 10:39 AM : Jun 26, 2008

Not all those MS13 members (very scary by the way) came here illegally, nor came came here as members. They recruit like a company would. You start locking up these offenders for life for things pertaining to violent gun use (less then homicide)...you''ll see them start to dissapear.

[jawsweapons1]

Look at the gov''t and the police force. I feel more safe carrying my own weapon than relying on a bunch of overweight liers trying to protect me. It is our contitutional right to bear arms and anyone who doesn''t like our constitutional rights can go forth and have no protection because to me, it seems that the police are not around until after the crime. Where''s the protection in that.

[usmcvn2]

Well, I see the gun nuts are out in force today after today''''s Supreme Court ruling. Why some people like being armed to the teeth with weapons that are meant only to kill other human beings is beyond me.

Remember, JCS, that "silly old constitution" you make reference to is only a "********* piece of paper" to your Decider-in-Chief.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by shoebox119 at 10:28 AM : Jun 26, 2008

Well than go away. Its a story about gun rights not treehugging rights. The gun people should be commenting here. All others please go to a treehugging or house husband story to rant & rave.

[lib_crusher]

Well than go away. Its a story about gun rights not treehugging rights.

Posted by usmcvn2 at 10:44 AM : Jun 26, 2008

LOL!!!

[captcrash04]

Well, I guess the Court isn''t totally off it''s rocker. I mean they finally made a decision in favor of the people''s rights vs. the criminal''s rights, as they did with the Gitmo and child rape decisions....

[kindrox]

And those same five obviously don''''t seem to grasp the meaning of "a well regulated militia" either.

So, what''''s your point?

______________________________________

You obviously are not reading the actual opinion like I am right now or you would not be such a moron. How many morons on here will NEVER read the opinion, just HAVE a dumb, uninformed opinion?

[xraytwonine]

that''s a *** good looking pistol in the photo attached to this article

[omega39-2009]

Now we need them to revisit the 4th amendment.

[jb01201a]

Well Posted by One-American, that is true, cry baby to these loser libs. For once, a right decision for a change.

[mbcsmith]

Thank goodness Ginsburg, Breyer, Souter and Stevens didn''t take away ANOTHER inalienable right in their attack on Americans.

[cusefanjapan]

Don''t forget to put your Glock inside your bible when you go to church to pray.

[cbsblogger]

At least the USSC goes on the record to prevent any fascist administration from ever restricting firearm ownership in the name of increasing homeland security due to the war on terror.

[mbcsmith]

You obviously are not reading the actual opinion like I am right now or you would not be such a moron. How many morons on here will NEVER read the opinion, just HAVE a dumb, uninformed opinion?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by kindrox at 10:47 AM : Jun 26, 2008



Funny how the elitist LIBS resort to name calling when they can''t support an issue.

[haoli25]

DC had it wrong with an attempted ban. Focus needs to be on punishing those who use the guns in violent manners. You start locking up criminals up for life for attempted robberies with a gun, or life for the sale of an unregistered gun (or black market sales)...then we''''ll start to see a safer world. You''''ll never be able to remove guns from our streets...but we can sure work on removing the violent offenders Posted by mjm117


As a legal gun owner, I agree with that completely.

[lib_crusher]

inGOPigs appointed to federal courts are the lowest life form in the USA. Americans absolutley do not have the right to bear arms. The jinGOPigs have muddled the US Constitution to fit their warped sense of the Englich language.

Posted by neoconism at 10:48 AM : Jun 26, 2008

And now, back to your regularly scheduled programming on the jihad channel.

[cawpin-2009]

"And those same five obviously don''''t seem to grasp the meaning of "a well regulated militia" either.

So, what''''s your point?"

You seem to be the one that can''t grasp the meaning. "Regulated", in this case, means well equipped, ie. well armed. Also, a militia is made up of citizens, not soldiers. The "being necessary to the security of a free state" part is a clarification of meaning. In whole, the 2nd Amendment means that a well armed public is necessary to keep a state, or country, safe and secure.

[haoli25]

that''''s a *** good looking pistol in the photo attached to this article Posted by xraytwonine



The small picture that shows the muzzle is a Model 1911. The old .45 ACP pistol that was used in World War II

[mbcsmith]

Why are you Nazi lovers from the fringe reicht wing not in Iraq defending your Israeli motherland?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Posted by neoconism at 10:54 AM : Jun 26, 2008


Say hello to my little friend.....

[kindrox]

* Funny how the elitist LIBS resort to name calling when they can''''t support an issue. *

________________________________

Funny how actually *having* and educated opinion nowdays is being *elitist* to morons. Doubly so because someone who knew me would never call me a liberal!

[lib_crusher]

Lot of reicht winged gun toting Nazis on board this morning. Hello COWARDS! Whats your IQ? 70?

Posted by neoconism at 10:50 AM : Jun 26, 2008

Lemme guess...you bought the do-it-yourself IQ test and you got a 71. Now your bragging?? LOL!!!

[captcrash04]

Hey kindrox, check your definition of "well Regulated" make sure you find the meaning used in 1791.... Then you will be informed....

[tae9800]

When basic rights are taken away from citizens, the law abiding suffer the consequences. We are a great nation because our forefathers had great wisdom to provide us with the basic freedoms that once were suppressed under British and French rule. We THINK we know what it would be like without guns in the hands of citizens, but one is not very educated historically or chooses not to remember how this nation became the "melting pot" that it is with that opinion. %u2018Gun Ownership%u2019 and the basic RIGHT to protect ones self would be sorely missed if one did not have it. People who fear guns don''t know about guns or what they know is learned from irresponsible owners / users. If gun safety was taught to children like water or road safety, we would have fewer tragedies. I grew up in a rural area - guns are necessary for food and protection. I am proud that the Supreme Court made a decision today based on what the second amendment SAYS not on what a portion of the population FEELS. Like I said before bill of rights and constitution was composed by men who knew oppression and the cost of freedom and we would be wise to continue to take heed of their plan for our great nation. It%u2019s worked for two-hundred plus years %u2013 I think it can work for another two-hundred years if WE don%u2019t mess it up!

[usmcvn2]

Posted by cawpin at 10:53 AM : Jun 26, 2008

Well said! Very true!