News Column

Supreme Court May Hear Guns Case

April 15, 2013

Guns are on the docket in Congress and dozens of state legislatures. Can the Supreme Court be far behind?

The court may decide as early as today to consider whether the Second Amendment's right to keep a gun for self-defense extends outside the home.

The case under consideration is a challenge to New York's law that requires "proper cause" to carry a weapon in public. Ten states -- including California, New Jersey and Maryland -- have similar restrictions. Most have been challenged in court.

Whether it grants the petition from New York or waits for another case, the Supreme Court is virtually certain to weigh in. That's because lower federal courts have issued split decisions on state laws designed to restrict the prevalence of handguns on the streets.

"It's only a matter of time before the court decides whether people have a right to carry guns in public," says Adam Winkler, a UCLA law professor and author of Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. "This is the biggest unanswered question about the Second Amendment."

The requests for high-court review come as federal and state lawmakers are considering new gun laws in the wake of December's killing of 26 students and staff members at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. The slayings have boosted public support for gun controls.

While 17 states have passed new laws since the Newtown shootings and Congress is considering legislation, most of the court action is in the other direction -- challenges to state restrictions.

The challenges are an outgrowth of the Supreme Court's 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, which upheld the right to possess firearms in the home for self-defense but left a wide berth for restrictions.

"Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms," Justice Antonin Scalia wrote for the court's 5-4 majority.

Asked recently whether the Second Amendment's right to bear arms is as unequivocal as the First Amendment's right to free speech, Scalia said, "We're going to find out, aren't we?" -- an indication he expects the court to hear a gun-rights case in the future. "There are doubtless limits (on gun rights), but what they are, we will see," Scalia said.

Most of the lower-court cases involve laws that require applicants to demonstrate a need for a permit to carry guns in public. State officials contend street crime is more prevalent than inside private homes. Opponents say the restrictions render the Second Amendment impotent.

Perhaps the biggest battle is in Illinois, the only state (along with the District of Columbia) to prohibit carrying concealed weapons under most circumstances.

A federal district court upheld the ban, but a three-judge panel of the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals struck it down.

The state has yet to appeal that decision. Its attorney general, Lisa Madigan, is considering a run for governor, and while a Supreme Court challenge might be popular in Chicago, it could run afoul of gun enthusiasts in rural Illinois.

Petitions from state governments usually carry more sway with the high court than others, so the justices may decide to wait for that case. It also would present them with a more narrow question to resolve, rather than addressing lesser restrictions in 10 states from New England to Hawaii.

The New York attorney general's office argues in its brief to the Supreme Court that the lower-court decision should stand. The state has a "compelling interest in public safety and crime prevention" that makes gun regulation necessary, it says.

Those challenging the New York law argue that as a result, the right to bear arms is "illusory." Their brief to the Supreme Court contends that such a restriction hasn't been placed on the freedom of speech, worship -- or even abortion.

"The New York law is in complete conflict with the idea that people enjoy a Second Amendment right to bear arms," says Alan Gura, the lawyer for the plaintiffs, who successfully argued the Heller case. "If this can be done to the Second Amendment, look out."

For more stories covering politics, please see HispanicBusiness' Politics Channel

Source: Copyright USA TODAY 2013

Story Tools Facebook Linkedin Twitter RSS Feed Email Alerts & Newsletters