District of Columbia v Heller: A Landmark Case on the Second Amendment

This article discusses the landmark case of District of Columbia v Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) that challenged the infringement of the right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. The case was won by the petitioner, Dick Anthony Heller, and the Supreme Court held that an individual’s right to keep and bear arms is protected for any traditional lawful purpose like self-defense in home and it is not connected with any service in a militia.

Running head: CIVIL LAW
CIVIL LAW
Name of Student
Name of University
Author Note

1CIVIL LAW
Supreme Court Ruling
Out of the five Supreme Court rulings that had been provided, the ruling that has been
selected for analyzing is the landmark case of District of Columbia v Heller, 554 U.S. 570
(2008). The rule of law that had been challenged in the case was the infringement of the right to
keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution under the
provisions of the Firearms Control Regulations Act 1975. The state that was a part of the case
was the District of Columbia. The petitioner in the case is Dick Anthony Heller. In the case it
was seen that Heller sought an injunction arguing that certain provisions of the District of
Columbia code violated his right under the Second Amendment of the US Constitution to be
keeping a functional firearm in home without any license. The respondent in this case was the
District of Columbia. The respondent argued that the second amendment does not create
unlimited right for the possession of guns for the purposes of self-defense. It was good that the
amendments purpose is specifically related to the state militias and it provides protection of the
right to keep and bear arms for certain purposes of the military and not for any nonmilitary use or
ownership of any kind of weapon. In the case the second amendment of the constitution had been
discussed. The second amendment, ratified on December 15, 1791 is seen to be protecting the
individual right to be keeping and bearing arms. The part of the second amendment that was
discussed in the case was the right of a person to be wearing and keeping arms for the necessity
of two security of a Free State. The final score of the case was 5 to 4. Date on which the decision
of the court was finalized was on June 26, 2008. The petitioner won the case. In the case the
Supreme Court of the United States held that in the Second Amendment of the Constitution of
United States and individual’s right to keep and bear arms have been protected for any traditional

2CIVIL LAW
lawful purpose like self-defense in home and it is not connected with any service in a militia. The
Court further stated that the district of Columbia ban on handgun and its requirement of keeping
lawfully on Rifles and shotguns to be unloaded assembled it is a violation to the second
amendment. Since the ruling there have been almost 80 different places in lower Federal courts
for one controller in which almost all of the gun control measures presented in the legislation had
been ruled as lawful by the courts. Following the judgment of the case the District of Columbia
council on December 16, 2008 passed the Firearms Registration Emergency Amendment Act
2008 addressing the issues raised in the Heller case and for strengthening the gun laws of the
district.

3CIVIL LAW
Reference
Constitution of the United States of America
District of Columbia v Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)
Firearms Control Regulations Act 1975
Firearms Registration Emergency Amendment Act 2008