Believe it or not, the Ninth Circuit Court ruled today that the second amendment restricts the right powers of state and local governments to interfere with the individual right to gun ownership. The decison even observes that the right to bear arms is “deeply rooted in this Nation’s history and tradition.” Notes Cato Institute’s Ilya Shapiro, “I rarely get a chance to say this, but the Ninth Circuit gets it exactly right.”
On a related matter, I just got around to Brian Doherty’s Gun Control on Trial: Inside the Supreme Court Battle Over the Second Amendment. It’s a terrific accounting of the Heller case, and definitely worth reading if you’re even remotely interested in gun rights.
UPDATE — This is why I’m not a lawyer. From a reader:
I wish to point out something of fundamental importance. You stated:
“…the Ninth Circuit Court ruled today that the second amendment restricts the right of state and local government’s to interfere with the individual right to gun ownership.”
I am not being critical, but in the US, there is a fundamental difference between “rights” (which people possess inherently) and “powers” (which government’s possess after being authorized them by the people). Given that, talk of “restricting the right of state and local gov’s” is wholly incorrect. Goverments don’t have rights, and they never will. They have powers, which derive from the consent of the people.
Indeed, Doherty’s take on Heller is very insightful!