The Supreme Court's ruling Thursday in the much awaited gun case of District of Columbia v Heller gave us something that's never happened before in US history, that being a clear ruling on the merits of gun rights and the Second Amendment.
While the Second Amendment was ratified in 1791, it has stirred very little legal action since then. The last time a gun case reached the Supreme Court was in 1939, and even then, the Court sidestepped any major judgment.
This time was different, as the Court made clear that there is an individual right to bear arms under the Constitution.
"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to posses a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home," read one point in the majority opinion written by Justice Antonin Scalia.
Scalia though later acknowledged that there are limits on those gun rights, just as there are limits on the freedom of speech in the First Amendment.
"It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose," read the opinion.
In fact, Scalia seemed to go out of his way to note some of the exceptions.
"The Court's opinion should not 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," wrote Scalia.
"I'm very pleased to have been able to take case, along with the help of my attorneys to the highest court in the land," said security guard Dick Heller, who challenged the DC gun ban six years ago.
"I'm very happy that now, I'm able to defend myself and my household in my own home," added Heller, who spoke to reporters outside the Supreme Court.
One thing seems very clear to me, this is only the beginning of a series of legal skirmishes around the country on gun rights. The National Rifle Association quickly made clear it would use the ruling to challenge gun laws in several major cities, for example.
It may have taken over 200 years to set out an individual's right to bear arms, now it will take a few more years to actually flesh out how far the Court wants to go.
One final thought - this ruling is also a reminder that election results are important. If Al Gore had won Florida in 2000, the outcome of this case might have been much different.
Democrats have only put two of the current nine Justices on the Court because they have won only three of the last ten presidential elections.
About the Author
