Updated March 02, 2010
Supreme Court Considers Reach of Second Amendment
AP
WASHINGTON -- The Supreme Court appeared willing Tuesday to say that the U.S. Constitution's right to possess guns limits state and local regulation of firearms. But the justices also suggested that some gun control measures might not be affected.
At the very least, Tuesday's argument suggested that courts could be very busy in the years ahead determining precisely which gun laws are allowed under the Constitution's Second Amendment "right to keep and bear arms," and which must be stricken.
The court heard arguments in a case that challenges handgun bans in the Chicago area by asking the high court to extend to state and local jurisdictions the sweep of its 2008 decision striking down a gun ban in the federal enclave of Washington, D.C.
The biggest questions before the court seemed to be how, rather than whether, to issue such a ruling and whether some regulation of firearms could survive. On the latter point, Justice Antonin Scalia said the majority opinion he wrote in the 2008 case "said as much."
The extent of gun rights are "still going to be subject to the political process," said Chief Justice John Roberts, who was in the majority in 2008.
James Feldman, a Washington-based lawyer representing Chicago, urged the court to reject the challenges to the gun laws in Chicago and a suburb. Handguns have been banned in those two places for nearly 30 years.
The court has held that most of the rest of the Constitution's Bill of Rights applies to state and local laws. But Feldman said the Second Amendment should be treated differently because guns are different. "Firearms are designed to injure and kill," he said.
But Feldman ran into difficulty with some of the five justices who formed the majority in 2008. Justice Anthony Kennedy, who joined Scalia's opinion two years ago, said it seemed to him that Feldman was arguing that the court got it wrong two years ago.
Kennedy said other constitutional provisions have been applied, or "incorporated," against the states without stripping them of the authority to impose reasonable regulations. "Why can't we do the same thing with firearms?" he asked.
Of the other two justices in the 2008 majority, Justice Samuel Alito also appeared to agree that the Second Amendment should be extended to state and local laws and Justice Clarence Thomas said nothing, as is his custom during argument.
Tuesday's statements from the court also left little doubt that it would not break new ground in how it might apply the Second Amendment to states and cities.
-------------------------------------------------------
Now, from someone FROM the Chicago area let me be clear on this. There is a reason why Chicago has had one of the highest murder/crime rates in the country. It is because all of the criminals know you don't carry a weapon. If they thought for a second you had a gun, crime/murder would drop.