“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”
Possibly the most misunderstood of the Bill of Rights, the 2d amendment was written to make the clear the necessity of formalizing the citizen militias that existed at the time of it’s writing.
The Supreme Court last ruled on it in the 1930’s making clear that gun control laws were clearly constitutional, although upholding citizens rights to “bear arms”.
This is frequently cited as the right illucidated in the amendment, which, as you can see from the entire amendment above, is not.
Today, however, the Supreme Court has agreed to hear a case that is largely financed by a libertarian activist.
The gun laws in the District of Columbia are the strictest in the country.
Handguns are not allowed to be kept in homes and rifles or shotguns must be equipped with trigger locks or be partially disassembled.
A security guard in the District, bankrolled by the libertarian activist, brought suit against the District because he was claiming the right to keep his on duty revolver at home when he wasn’t working.
The district court ruled that the gun laws were unconstitutional. A first.
So, my fear is that this absurdly right wing court, will once again abandon it’s strict constructionist agenda and greatly expand the perceived meaning of the 2d amendment.
Look toward next October for this one.