McDonald v. Chicago: Guns, Obama, and the Supreme Court

Today, the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that gun ownership is a fundamental right of Americans. Contrary to National Rifle Association press releases and conventional wisdom, it was never a settled issue. In overturning Chicago’s ban on hand guns within its city limits, the Supremes dropped the other shoe. The first shoe was finding a similar law in Washington D.C., a federal jurisdiction, also unconstitutional. McDonald v. Chicago now extends that ruling to all cities and states.

While the ruling of this case gets the headlines, it is the dicta of the case that is absolutely stunning, and will have liberal legal eagles flapping their wings furiously for years. The S.C. could have determined this case in 10 pages or less. Instead, it has provided the country with a 207 page treatise on Constitutional law. It is brilliant. It is historical. And its conclusions should be a warning to any President or political party that is willing to play fast and loose with the Constitution in order to achieve social utopian dreams. This is the Supreme Court reasserting the rights of citizens to defend themselves against tyranny, and re-examining the compact between citizens and the state.

I am no constitutional scholar, and I found reading the opinion tedious. But the message and logic are clear. Up until the Civil War, the court stated that the rights granted citizens in the Constitution only related to laws passed by the Federal government. States could pretty much do as they pleased. It had to be that way because of slavery.

After the Civil War, the Court had a problem. The country passed the 13th and 14th Amendments to the Constitution ending slavery and granting citizenship to African Americans. But in order to enforce it, the courts had to re-examine the relationship between constitutionally guaranteed rights, the federal government, and the state governments. In a series of cases, it changed its approach, and ruled states could not abrogate fundamental constitutionally guaranteed rights. This particularly related to the rights of former slaves to own guns. To allow southern states to outlaw former slaves from owning guns would deprive them of their right to protect themselves from not only other citizens…but also local and state governments.

Wow!! And the court goes onto to reiterate that position in this ruling. The right of Americans to bear arms is fundamental to our system and is part of the fabric of our checks and balances protection between the government and its citizens. In our American psyche, the mistrust of strong, centralized government still rings loud and true.

While the ruling of the case settles a long standing dispute, the dicta is a clear shot across the bow of Obama’s utopian vision of the world based on social justice rather than the rule of law and the Constitution. It raises the hue and cry against rampant and relentless expansion and centralization of power in Washington and into the White House itself. The progressives should take note. “Don’t tread on me” is alive and well.

This 207 page decision will be the foundational document studies in all future Constitutional law classes…and should be a primer for our politicians. It should be required reading.