Going Ballistic On Gun Control

The Supreme Court takes up local gun control laws in oral arguments Tuesday in a case that could not only overturn a number of state and local gun control laws in the country, but could theoretically overturn a post-Civil War precedent.

The conservative majority that struck down Washington, D.C.'s, handgun ban in 2008 appears poised to stretch the Second Amendment further. The hourlong session Tuesday will let justices test-fire arguments in a case in which the reasoning could be as intriguing as the outcome.

For gun owners and lawmakers, the case called McDonald v. City of Chicago presents one bottom line: If the court agrees that the Second Amendment covers state and local governments, as seems likely, some but not all gun restrictions will be blown away.

For constitutional scholars, the court's means may be as important as its ends. In order to eliminate Chicago's gun ban, court conservatives could end up overturning a 137-year-old precedent that's hindered the expansion of new rights.

With the case so crucial, the sidelines are jammed. Forty-nine amicus briefs have flooded the court, representing groups ranging from Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership to specialists in 17th-century English history.

The attorneys general for Florida, Texas, Alaska and 34 other states have urged the court to strike down Chicago's gun ban. So have a majority of members of Congress, and individual prosecutors from 34 California counties.

"The people's right to arms is inextricably tied to the equally fundamental right to defend oneself, to fight to save one's own life," Fresno County District Attorney Elizabeth A. Egan and her colleagues argue.

Considering the last major case they decided put billions of corporate dollars into campaigns, I don't have high hopes for this decision either.