Mcdonald V. City of Chicago Case Briefing

729 Words3 Pages
1. Case Citation: McDonald v. City of Chicago, 130 S. Ct. 3020 (2010) 2. Facts: * Procedural (history) - what lower courts decided * The U.S. District Court and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit affirms, holding that the Second Amendment does not apply to states or localities. * Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court Of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit * Reversed and remanded * NRA of Am., Inc. v. City of Chicago, 567 F.3d 856, 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 11721 (7th Cir. Ill., 2009) * District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S., 128 S.Ct. 2783, 171 L.Ed.2d 637 (2008), * held that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of…show more content…
3. Issue(s): * Whether the Second Amendment the right to bear arms applies to individual states * Whether the Second Amendment is incorporated in the 14th Amendment’s due process clause. 4. Holding: * The Court held that the Second Amendment, the right to keep and bear arms for self defense in one's home is fully applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. * The majority said the Second Amendment was applicable because it was “incorporated” in the 14th Amendment's Due Process Clause, which guarantees that the states may not “deprive any person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law 5. Rule: * A City ordinance states that “no person shall . . . possess . . . any firearm unless such person is the holder of a valid registration certificate for such firearm.” * Chicago, Ill., Municipal Code §8–20–040(a) (2009). * Further into the municipal code, it prohibits registration of most handguns, essentially banning any type of handgun possession by all citizens who reside in the City. * Chicago, Ill., Municipal Code §8–20–050(c). * Like Chicago, Oak Park makes it “unlawful for any person to possess . . . any firearm,” a term that includes “pistols, revolvers, guns and small arms . . . commonly known as handguns.” * Oak Park, Ill., Municipal Code §§27–2–1 (2007),

More about Mcdonald V. City of Chicago Case Briefing

Open Document