Content Focus: D.C. v. Heller SS.7.C.3.12 Analyze the significance and outcomes of landmark Supreme Court cases including, but not limited to… Content Focus: D.C. v. Heller The Second Amendment Photo: http://passtheammo.com/wp-content/uploads/high-court-guns.jpg Note: A longer, more in depth PowerPoint presentation is available under Section 7 of the FLREA Civics Curriculum. This is an abbreviated version for the “Getting to the Point” section on the FLREA curriculum.

2nd Amendment A well regulated militia, being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

OR Is it a right granted to only the military and the police? Is it an individual right of the people? OR

Applying the Second Amendment The Case: D.C. v. Heller

Facts of the Case The District of Columbia passed the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975. This law made it a crime to carry an unlicensed handgun, and limited the distribution of licensed handguns mainly to police and security officers. It also required that all legal firearms must be kept unloaded and disassembled or trigger locked.

US District Court for D.C. A group of private gun owners filed a claim in the US District Court for D.C. Claimed the mentioned provisions of the D.C. law violated the 2nd Amendment Graphics from: http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/

Decision of the US District Court in D.C. Ruled that the 2nd amendment does not allow an individual right to bear arms except when part of a militia (ex. National Guard). Second Amendment does not apply to private gun ownership.

U.S. Court of Appeals The case was appealed to the US Court of Appeal in D.C. as Parker v. District of Columbia As before, the claim was that the mentioned provisions of the D.C. law violated the 2nd Amendment. Graphics from: http://www.film.dc.gov/film/lib/film/DC_Court_of_Appeals.JPG

US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit Held 2-1 that… The only person with standing for purposes of this case was Mr. Heller since he had applied for a handgun permit and was denied. The 2nd Amendment does protect private, individual gun ownership, so the D.C. law was unconstitutional.

What happened next? US District Court US District Court US Court of Appeals United States Supreme Court Appeal Appeal

Question Before the Court Does the Second Amendment protect an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self- defense within the home?

Outcome: D.C. v. Heller 2nd amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm, even if that person is not in a militia The firearm may be used for traditionally lawful purposes, like self defense https://www.oyez.org/cases/2007/07-290

Quoting the Case “There seems to us no doubt, on the basis of both text and history, that the Second Amendment conferred an individual right to keep and bear arms. Of course the right was not unlimited, just as the First Amendment’s right of free speech was not[.]” Justice Antonin Scalia, 554 US 570 (2008)

Significance of the Case The Supreme Court had not ruled on the meaning of the Second Amendment in 70 years. First time the Court interpreted the Second Amendment to mean that an individual has a right to legally possess firearms for private lawful use.