McDonald v. Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), is a
landmark[1] decision of the
Supreme Court of the United States that found that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms," as protected under the
Second Amendment, is
incorporated by either the
Due Process Clause or
Privileges or Immunities Clause of the
Fourteenth Amendment and is thereby enforceable against the
states. The decision cleared up the uncertainty left in the wake of
District of Columbia v. Heller as to the scope of
gun rights in regard to the states.
Initially the
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit had upheld a Chicago ordinance banning the possession of handguns as well as other gun regulations affecting rifles and shotguns, citing
United States v. Cruikshank,
Presser v. Illinois, and
Miller v. Texas.
[2] The petition for certiorari was filed by
Alan Gura, the attorney who had successfully argued
Heller, and Chicago-area attorney David G. Sigale.
[3] The
Second Amendment Foundation and the Illinois State Rifle Association sponsored the litigation on behalf of several Chicago residents, including retiree Otis McDonald.
The
oral arguments took place on March 2, 2010.
[4][5] On June 28, 2010, the Supreme Court, in a 5–4 decision, reversed the Seventh Circuit's decision, holding that the
Second Amendment was incorporated under the
Fourteenth Amendment thus protecting those rights from infringement by state and local governments.
[6] It then
remanded the case back to Seventh Circuit to resolve conflicts between certain Chicago
gun restrictions and the
Second Amendment.
McDonald v. City of Chicago - Wikipedia
