Supreme Court Upholds Second Amendment Right to Bear Arms in District of Columbia v. Heller

Today in a 5-4 decision, the Supreme Court struck down the ban on handguns in the District of Columbia. At issue in District of Columbia v. Heller was whether the Second Amendment protected the right of individuals to bear arms, or whether it applied only to the collective rights of states to maintain militias.

In the majority opinion written by Justice Scalia, the Court held that the individual right to possess a firearm is unrelated to service in a militia, and instead, was a right to bear arms for “traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.” In reaching its decision, the Court examined the language used in the Second Amendment, which provides: “[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.” The majority noted that the operative clause used in the Second Amendment was the “right of the people to keep and bear [a]rms.” The Court determined the phrase “right of the people” referred to an individual right rather than a collective right. In dissecting the phrase “keep and bear arms,” the Court found “arms” traditionally referred to “weapons that were not specifically designed for military use and were not employed in a military capacity.” The majority also determined that the most natural meaning of the phrase “keep arms” was “have weapons.” The Court went on to note that every time the phrase “keep arms” was used in the founding era, the phrase referred to an individual right unconnected with militia service. Having addressed the operative clause, the Court went on to address the prefatory clause “[a] well regulated [m]ilitia being necessary to the security of a free [s]tate…” The majority found that the phrase “well-regulated militia” referred to every man who was physically capable of bearing arms. The majority also pointed out that “a militia” was distinguishable from the phrase “organized militia,” and that the phrase “well-regulated” meant only “the imposition of proper discipline and training.” The majority went on to note that the “security of a free state” referred to the “security of the polity” rather than the security of each of the several states. Having addressed each phrase in the pertinent portion of the Second Amendment, the majority concluded that the Second Amendment created an individual right to keep and bear arms.

Majority: Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy, Thomas, Alito

Dissent: Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer