Miller v. United States was argued in the Supreme Court in 1939. During the 1930’s there was a lot of federal regulation attempting to remedy the great depression. This is also the time period of the dust bowl when agriculture was at an all time low. This case was brought to the Hughes Court.
Jack Miller and Frank Layton were charged with violating the National Firearms Act by transporting a 12 gauge double barrel shotgun. They then sued the United States for violating their second amendment rights. The question the court had to answer was “Does the Second Amendment protect an individual's right to keep and bear arms?” Precedents used to come to a decision in this case include Sonzinsky v. United States (1937) and several state statutes.
District of Columbia v Heller was argued in the Supreme Court in 2008. During this time, the country was experiencing the late 2000 recession that destroyed the realty market. 2008 is also the year the country voted for change and elected the first ever African American president, Barrack Obama. The country was still involved in the Iraq and Afghanistan war which left middle east tensions high. More notably in relation to this case, the Virginia tech shooting happened the year prior to this case being argued. This case was brought to the Roberts court.
The District of Columbia outlawed the ability to carry unregistered handguns and prohibited the registration of handguns, with the provision that the chief of police could issue one-year licenses for hand guns. The law also required registered handgun owners to keep their gun unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock unless in the use of business or other legal recreational activities. A D.C police officer named Dick Anthony Heller who was already authorized to carry a handgun while on duty, applied for a gun licence to keep a gun at home and was denied. The officer then sued the District of Columbia for violating his second amendment rights. The question the court had to answer was “Do the provisions of the District of Columbia Code that restrict the licensing of handguns and require licensed firearms kept in the home to be kept nonfunctional violate the Second Amendment?”. The court first had to break the amendment down in to two parts. Its prefatory clause and its operative clause. The operative clause discusses the pre-existing right to “bear arms” through the statement of “ shall not be infringed” . The judges then discussed its prefatory clause to what a “A well regulated Militia” actually is and what is “necessary to the security of a free State … .”. The Supreme Court came to a 5- 4 decision deeming the D.C law unconstitutional and the majority opinion was drafted by Justice Scalia. A relevant precedent that was discussed in the majority opinion was United States v Miller (1939).
Finally McDonald v Chicago was decided in june 2010. In 2010 the United States was attempting to recover from the late 2000 recession. There was a huge BP oil spill in the gulf of Mexico. More importantly, only two years prior the District of Columbia v Heller case was decided that found a federal law violated the second amendment. The Roberts court heard this Supreme Court case.
Otis Mcdonald was a Chicago resident that wanted to keep a firearm in his house but was unable to due to a Chicago ordinance outlawing the ability to have a firearm without a license. This same ordinance also prohibited the registration of most handguns. Essentially outlawing private citizen gun ownership. The question the court had to answer was ,“ Does the Second Amendment apply to the states because it is incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges and Immunities or Due Process clauses and thereby made applicable to the states?” . The Roberts court came to a 5-4 decision that the Chicago law was in fact Constitutional. A relevant precedent is of course District of Columbia v Heller that creates the precedent that self-defense is a basic right.
Jack Miller and Frank Layton were charged with violating the National Firearms Act by transporting a 12 gauge double barrel shotgun. They then sued the United States for violating their second amendment rights. The question the court had to answer was “Does the Second Amendment protect an individual's right to keep and bear arms?” Precedents used to come to a decision in this case include Sonzinsky v. United States (1937) and several state statutes.
District of Columbia v Heller was argued in the Supreme Court in 2008. During this time, the country was experiencing the late 2000 recession that destroyed the realty market. 2008 is also the year the country voted for change and elected the first ever African American president, Barrack Obama. The country was still involved in the Iraq and Afghanistan war which left middle east tensions high. More notably in relation to this case, the Virginia tech shooting happened the year prior to this case being argued. This case was brought to the Roberts court.
The District of Columbia outlawed the ability to carry unregistered handguns and prohibited the registration of handguns, with the provision that the chief of police could issue one-year licenses for hand guns. The law also required registered handgun owners to keep their gun unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock unless in the use of business or other legal recreational activities. A D.C police officer named Dick Anthony Heller who was already authorized to carry a handgun while on duty, applied for a gun licence to keep a gun at home and was denied. The officer then sued the District of Columbia for violating his second amendment rights. The question the court had to answer was “Do the provisions of the District of Columbia Code that restrict the licensing of handguns and require licensed firearms kept in the home to be kept nonfunctional violate the Second Amendment?”. The court first had to break the amendment down in to two parts. Its prefatory clause and its operative clause. The operative clause discusses the pre-existing right to “bear arms” through the statement of “ shall not be infringed” . The judges then discussed its prefatory clause to what a “A well regulated Militia” actually is and what is “necessary to the security of a free State … .”. The Supreme Court came to a 5- 4 decision deeming the D.C law unconstitutional and the majority opinion was drafted by Justice Scalia. A relevant precedent that was discussed in the majority opinion was United States v Miller (1939).
Finally McDonald v Chicago was decided in june 2010. In 2010 the United States was attempting to recover from the late 2000 recession. There was a huge BP oil spill in the gulf of Mexico. More importantly, only two years prior the District of Columbia v Heller case was decided that found a federal law violated the second amendment. The Roberts court heard this Supreme Court case.
Otis Mcdonald was a Chicago resident that wanted to keep a firearm in his house but was unable to due to a Chicago ordinance outlawing the ability to have a firearm without a license. This same ordinance also prohibited the registration of most handguns. Essentially outlawing private citizen gun ownership. The question the court had to answer was ,“ Does the Second Amendment apply to the states because it is incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges and Immunities or Due Process clauses and thereby made applicable to the states?” . The Roberts court came to a 5-4 decision that the Chicago law was in fact Constitutional. A relevant precedent is of course District of Columbia v Heller that creates the precedent that self-defense is a basic right.