NRA Urges Supreme Court to Overturn Chicago Gun Ban
Last week, NRA filed a petition
for certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court in the case of NRA v.
Chicago. The NRA strongly disagrees with the decision issued by a three-judge panel of the U.S.
Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, holding that the Second Amendment does
not apply to state and local governments.
"The Seventh Circuit got it wrong. As the Supreme Court said in last year's
landmark Heller decision, the Second Amendment is
an individual right that 'belongs to all Americans'. Therefore, we
are taking our case to the highest court in the land," said NRA-ILA Executive
Director, Chris W. Cox. "The Seventh Circuit claimed it was bound
by precedent from previous decisions. However, it should have
followed the lead of the recent Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in
Nordyke
v. Alameda County, which found that those cases don't prevent
the Second Amendment from applying to the states through the due process clause
of the Fourteenth Amendment."
This Seventh Circuit opinion upholds current bans on the possession of
handguns in Chicago and Oak Park, Illinois.
"It is wrong that the residents of Chicago and Oak Park continue to have
their Second Amendment rights denied," Cox concluded. "It's time for the
fundamental right of self-defense to be respected by every jurisdiction
throughout our country."
Sign up for the OV Daily Newsletter
OV Social
The Constitution states in article VI, paragraph 2 that "This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding."
The 14 amendment states that ""No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States.""
Since the 2nd amendment provides the right to bear arms as something the government cannot infringe upon, how exactly would a complete gun ban not be a state law contrary to the Constitution?
Makes no sense. This was a bad ruling of the law .
Just as the FEDERAL laws forced the states to integrate; there should be no difference here. Either something is a fundamental right, or it isn't. Since gun possession has already been found to be such a right, there shouldn't be any question.