U.S. Supreme Court Takes Second Amendment Challenge To A Gun Control Law

Last week, the U.S. Supreme Court agreed to hear a Second Amendment challenge to a gun control law for the first time in nearly 10 years. Arguments in the case will likely be heard during the court’s next term, which starts in October. During the opening decade of the 21st Century, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two landmark rulings that many hoped would revitalize the Second Amendment, which had been all but read out of the Constitution by activist lower judges that favored banning or heavily restricting firearms. District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010) made abundantly clear that the Second Amendment is a fundamental civil right and should be respected as such by the nation’s courts and public officials. That did not happen. Instead, the rulings seemed mainly to energize the resistance to the right to keep and bear arms both within and without the judicial system. Billionaires turned social engineers – most notably Michael Bloomberg – created a new industry around more sophisticated and organized anti-gun efforts. Elite universities created research departments entirely devoted to engineering empirical support for gun control and rewriting American history as it pertains the Second Amendment and gun ownership. The same judges with their same lifetime appointments who refused to acknowledge the obvious import of the Second Amendment’s history and text refused to acknowledge the obvious import of the Heller and McDonald opinions. And one lower court decision after another upheld the most sweeping and oppressive forms of gun control, including bans on America’s most popular rifles[1], bans on magazines used for self-defense[2], bans on dealer sales of handguns to military-aged adults[3], mandatory handgun licensing fees of $340[4], discretionary licensing for the carrying of firearms[5], lengthy waiting periods to acquire guns[6], and infeasible manufacturing requirements that effectively ban new models of handguns[7]. Throughout it all, the high court seemed to have

Read more from our friends at the NRA...