![]() And while Heller also observed that no right is unlimited, presumably at some point limitations on the amount of ammunition one may carry in a constitutionally protected arm must run afoul of the Constitution. Heller addressed this point in striking down requirements that handguns in the home be rendered essentially unusable for lawful purposes. Anything less reduces firearms to fashion accessories, and there is no fundamental right to accessorize one’s clothing. Surely the right to keep and bear arms includes the right to an effective and functional arm. Since the court upheld the Second Amendment in striking down DC’s de facto handgun ban noting that it could not stand under any standard of scrutiny (there are three), it seems clear that the Heller case, and any case that involves a fundamental, unalienable right, would not be decided by any lesser standard than strict scrutiny. 3d, at 400, would fail constitutional muster. Under any of the standards of scrutiny that we have applied to enumerated constitutional rights, banning from the home ‘the most preferred firearm in the nation to ‘keep’ and use for protection of one’s home and family,’ 478 F. The majority reiterated that observation in the body of its opinion: Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition-in the place where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acute-would fail constitutional muster. The District’s total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of ‘arms’ that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense. This passage - appearing in the syllabus - comes closest to addressing that issue: ![]() Those mentioning this issue are correct in at least one sense: the Heller decision (PDF available here) does not specifically say that the majority’s opinion was done via strict scrutiny. To pass strict scrutiny, the legislature must have passed the law to further a ‘compelling governmental interest,’ and must have narrowly tailored the law to achieve that interest…įor a court to apply strict scrutiny, the legislature must either have significantly abridged a fundamental right with the law’s enactment… Strict scrutiny is a form of judicial review that courts use to determine the constitutionality of certain laws. Cornell’s Legal Information Institute defines strict scrutiny thusly:
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |