Supreme Court to Rule on Chicago Handgun Ban Challenge

Today the Supreme Court agreed to rule on one of the challenges to Chicago's handgun ban -- an important ruling that will decide the scope and power of the Second Amendment. From SCOTUSblog, which has a detailed breakdown of all the cases the Court has chosen to hear for its coming session:

The Court had three cases from which to choose on the Second Amendment issue - two cases involving a Chicago gun ban, and one case on a New York ban on a martial-arts weapon. It chose one of the Chicago cases - McDonald v. Chicago (08-1521) - a case brought to it by Alan Gura, the Alexandria, VA. lawyer who won the 2008 decision for the first time recognizing a constitutional right to have a gun for personal use, at least in self-defense in the home (District of Columbia v. Heller). A second appeal on the Chicago dispute had been filed by the National Rifle Association (NRA v. Chicago, 08-1497). Presumably, the Court will hold onto that case until it decides McDonald; the same is likely for the New York case, Maloney v. Rice (08-1592) - a case in which Justice Sonia Sotomayor had participated when she was a judge on the Second Circuit Court.

The Christian Science Monitor has a good overview of the issue at hand. For a more in-depth analysis on why the Court should strike down the ban, check out Damon Root over at Reason.

Also, in other Second Amendment news, over at NRO, there's a great interview with Judge Laurence Silberman on whether the Second Amendment is incorporated -- that is, whether or not it applies to states. The judge's answer:

"The interesting question now that is going to go before the Supreme Court is whether the Second Amendment is incorporated. . . . It would be anomalous for the Supreme Court to conclude that the Second Amendment creates or protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, but it does not apply vis a vis the states."

Anomalous, yes. But let's not forget that the 2nd Circuit Court, on which Sonia Sotomayor sat, didn't see it that way and ruled against incorporation. Let's hope SCOTUS is as clear-headed Silberman.

The full interview with Silberman is well-worth the watch.