SCOTUSBlog, Part IV

My comments from around the world:

First:

I just got done reading the majority opinion. IANAL, but here is my take:

It is an individual right, but not an unlimited right.
Absolute bans are out.
Trigger lock or disassembly requirements are out.
Guns are allowed to be kept in usable condition.
Licensing is ok(not addressed in this decision), but as long as the applicant is not a prohibited person, the registry has to be open. DC can NOT refuse to register a handgun if the applicant can legally own it.

Another thing to remember, this was planned to be a narrowly defined decision from the moment it first hit the court system. The respondents were carefully chosen, and they conceded some controversial issues, just to avoid losing on those grounds. Licensing was conceded during orals, to avoid a ruling on those grounds. The sole point of this entire case was to get SCOTUS precedent stating the 2A is an individual right.

And:

This is a foundational court case. There is now unambiguous SCOTUS precedent stating, very clearly, that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right.

The fight moves on. Expect dozens of court cases over the next few years to further define the right.

We won a battle, the war is hardly over. It was, however, an important battle.

And:

DeanC wrote:Awww crap

Because Heller conceded at oral argument that the D. C. licensing law is permissible if it is not enforced arbitrarily and capriciously, the Court assumes that a license will satisfy his prayer for relief and does not address the licensing requirement. Assuming he is not disqualified from exercising Second Amendment rights, the District must permit Heller to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home.

This isn't bad. Because Heller conceded, this issue was not addressed. There is NO SCOTUS opinion on the constitutionality of registration. It's open for another case.