When the U.S. Supreme Court struck down Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban in the 2008 case District of Columbia v. Heller, it did so because the Second Amendment protects "the core lawful purpose of self-defense." That includes "the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation." Two years later, the Court applied the same standard against state and local governments, overturning the Windy City's handgun ban in McDonald v. Chicago. Yet the Supreme Court has been silent on the Second Amendment ever since. Although multiple parties have sought review in a variety of gun control cases, the Court has yet to reenter the thicket surrounding the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.
That silence may soon be coming to an end, reports Reason Senior Editor Damon Root. Today the justices are meeting in private conference to consider the latest batch of petitions seeking review and among that batch is a Second Amendment case that is eminently worthy of the Court's attention. In fact, it presents the next logical step in the development of a coherent Second Amendment jurisprudence.