District of Columbia v. Heller Revisited District of Columbia v. Heller Revisited
District of Columbia v. Heller Revisited
District of Columbia v. Heller Revisited
BY TIM SCHMIDT - USCCA FOUNDER
"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."
So held the Supreme Court of the United States in a 5-4 decision on June 26, 2008, in the landmark District of Columbia v. Heller case.
According to SupremeCourt.gov, the case was argued March 18, 2008, and was based on a suit filed by Dick Anthony Heller against Washington, D.C. The background of that suit, laid out in the Supreme Court Syllabus, reads as follows:
District of Columbia law bans handgun possession by making it a crime to carry an unregistered firearm and prohibiting the registration of handguns; provides separately that no person may carry an unlicensed handgun, but authorizes the police chief to issue 1-year licenses; and requires residents to keep lawfully owned firearms unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device. Respondent Heller, a D.C. special policeman, applied to register a handgun he wished to keep at home, but the District refused. He filed this suit seeking, on Second Amendment grounds, to enjoin the city from enforcing the bar on handgun registration, the licensing requirement insofar as it prohibits carrying an unlicensed firearm in the home and the trigger-lock requirement insofar as it prohibits the use of functional firearms in the home.
It continues:
The District Court dismissed the suit, but the D.C. Circuit reversed, holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess firearms and that the city's total ban on handguns, as well as its requirement that firearms in the home be kept nonfunctional even when necessary for self-defense, violated that right.
The U.S. Supreme Court sided with Heller 5-4. Townhall points out that "Justices Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas and Alito [ruled] in Heller's favor. Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg and Breyer voted in favor of Washington, D.C."
Because Tuesday marked the 10-year anniversary of that paramount decision, Townhall recently reached out to a few prominent voices in the Second Amendment community, including Second Amendment Foundation Founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb, National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) Senior Vice President and General Counsel Larry Keane and Gun Owners of America Executive Director Erich Pratt. (I'm honored to have contributed my comments as well. You can read the full article here.)
In Townhall's review of the historic case, Gottlieb calls it "the cornerstone of Second Amendment litigation." He says that "without it, the McDonald Supreme Court decision that incorporated Fourteenth Amendment protection of Second Amendment rights would not have been possible. And without McDonald, all of the victories in federal court that have struck down a number of other anti-gun rights laws would not have happened."
Pratt told Townhall that "June 26, 2008, was a great day for freedom" because "the highest court in the land recognized the individual right of decent people to own a firearm for protection." He also claims that Heller "was not the end of the fight." He says "there are still many judges who are ignoring the Heller decision and who, quite frankly, ignore the Second Amendment as well. And so we continue to fight for our freedoms — in the courts, in the Congress and in state legislatures across the country."
Indeed.
Let's take a moment to express our gratitude for what this decision meant — and continues to mean — for law-abiding citizens. And then let's get back in the fight. There is still much work to be done.
Take Care and Stay Safe,
Tim Schmidt
Publisher - Concealed Carry Report
USCCA Founder