Daily Politics News Magazine
Covering Politics, Candidates & Issues from City Hall to Capitol Hill

The Supreme Court’s key Second Amendment opinion and what might come next


In that 5-4 milestone authored by the late Justice Antonin Scalia, the high court for the first time ruled that the Second Amendment’s “right to bear arms” protects an individual right, rather than one related to organized state militia as had been the legal understanding for decades.

Yet while Scalia established new precedent, drawing sharp dissents that he had misread history, the opinion came with caveats relevant to today’s gun control debate.

“Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited,” Scalia wrote as he laid out certain exceptions. History demonstrates, Scalia said, “the right was not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.”

Reflecting the fervor that the Second Amendment stirs, Scalia’s majority opinion striking down a Washington, DC, ban on handguns in the home ran 64 pages and dissenting opinions totaled 90 pages.

Individual justices today divide over the breadth of the right declared in Heller and when government may restrict firearms. Some conservative justices have pushed for a more expansive reading of gun rights.

Thirteen years ago, Scalia’s interpretation prevailed by a single vote. Today, any new decision — essentially interpreting Scalia’s interpretation — could similarly come down to a single vote.

The Supreme Court has declined to take up a significant Second Amendment case for more than a decade, but as it has rejected appeals, some justices increasingly complain that Heller’s legacy has been disserved. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito have been most persistent in pushing the majority to revisit and develop Heller, and Justices Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh have echoed their concerns.

“If a lower court treated another right so cavalierly, I have little doubt that this Court would intervene,” Thomas wrote in a 2018 case. “But as evidenced by our continued inaction in this area, the 2nd Amendment is a disfavored right in this Court.”
Who will be the next Antonin Scalia? Conservatives fight over his legacy
The newest justice, Amy Coney Barrett, a former law clerk to Scalia, has yet to hear a firearms case on the high court, but as an appellate judge she warned about treating “the Second Amendment as a second-class right.”

Scalia’s textualist interpretation

The Second Amendment dictates: “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.”

Before the Heller decision, federal judges generally regarded the Second Amendment as covering state militia, such as National Guards, rather than shielding individual rights.

In the 2008 ruling, Scalia, joined by four fellow conservatives, delved into the “originalist” understanding of the Framers in the 18th Century and concluded that the Second Amendment extended to private citizens.

The old guard of the judiciary moves on as Biden announces new picks for bench

“(T)he conception of the militia at the time of the Second Amendment’s ratification was the body of all citizens capable of military service, who would bring the sorts of lawful weapons that they possessed at home to militia duty,” he wrote, observing at another point that the phrase “bear arms” was “unambiguously used to refer to the carrying of weapons outside of an organized militia.”

Yet Scalia’s construction of history also led him to note some exceptions, for example, regarding concealed weapons. “(T)he majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were lawful under the Second Amendment or state analogues,” he wrote.

“Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing…



Read More: The Supreme Court’s key Second Amendment opinion and what might come next

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Get more stuff like this
in your inbox

Subscribe to our mailing list and get interesting stuff and updates to your email inbox.

Thank you for subscribing.

Something went wrong.