For gun rights activists, that has both upsides and downsides. On the one hand, it means that some gun-control laws, at least, will now be found unconstitutional. Most of the work of doing this will be done by lower courts, which have traditionally been pretty dismissive of Second Amendment rights, but thereâ€™sÂ some sign that lower courts are taking things more seriously sinceÂ Heller, and this case is likely to reinforce things considerably. Chicagoâ€™s existing anti-gun ordinance is very likely to be struck down now, as it is virtually the same as the D.C. gun ban struck down inÂ Heller. Other highly restrictive laws are also likely to fall.
On the other hand, if gun-rights activists sit back and expect the courts to do their work for them now, they will be sadly disappointed. If pressed with further cases (which Gura says he plans to bring), the courts will do some good. But the primary protection for gun rights up to now, and for all constitutional rights, really, is political. Judicial review was intended by the Framers to be a backup system, not the main source of protection. That was intended to come from the people â€” and realistically, because if people donâ€™t stand up for their own rights, courts are unlikely to take up the slack for long. (Especially when, as here, the protection comes in a 5-4 decision).
Absolutely. This is not the time for us to just let the courts handle things. SAF is a fine organization, and is doing great work with their litigation strategy. But they are a 501(c)(3), which means they cannotÂ participateÂ in the political process to the degree NRA can. Both groups are important. Professor Reynolds concludes:
Nonetheless, the Supreme Courtâ€™s Second Amendment decisions have made a major difference. In particular, they have offset the gun-control communityâ€™s longstanding effort to â€œdenormalizeâ€ firearms ownership â€” to portray it as something threatening, deviant, and vaguely perverse, and hence demanding strict regulation, if not outright prohibition. That effort went on for decades, and received much media support. Two decades ago, it seemed to be working.
But with the Supreme Court saying that itâ€™s clear the Framers regarded individual gun ownership as â€œnecessary to our system of ordered liberty,â€ that effort must be seen as a failure now. Gun ownership by law-abiding citizens is the new normal, and the Second Amendment is now normal constitutional law. It will stay so, as long as enough Americans care to keep it that way.
Read the whole article. Well worth your time. It’s almost hard to believe this is true, and when I first got into this issue I wouldn’t have believed it. But I’m increasingly believing it is true –they’ve lost this aspect of the culture wars. Now we just need to win broad protection for our rights.