Jun 28 2010

McDonald v Chicago: 5-4

Posted by

As a person who has recently become familiar with our Constitution, I am puzzled that McDonald v Chicago got as far as the Supreme Court.  It follows the Heller Decision which held that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for private use in federal enclaves, in this case, the District of Columbia.  The decision did not address the question of whether the Second Amendment extends beyond federal enclaves to the states.

Why is the right to bear arms even a question? Why is the obvious even being debated at the Supreme Court level? Does this mean that freedom of speech could be disputed as well? Read more »