|
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570 (2008)
District of Columbia v Heller: Private citizens have the right under the Second Amendment to possess an ordinary type of weapon and use it for lawful, historically established situations such as self-defense in a home, even when there is no relationship to a local militia
- District of Columbia v. Heller - Wikipedia
It was the first Supreme Court case to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense or whether the right was only intended for state militias [2]
- District of Columbia v. Heller | Constitution Center
Summary District of Columbia v Heller was the first time in several decades that the Supreme Court interpreted the words of the Second Amendment The case involved a ban on handguns in the home
- District of Columbia v. Heller - Britannica
Heller, case in which the U S Supreme Court on June 26, 2008, held (5–4) that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to possess firearms independent of service in a state militia and to use firearms for traditionally lawful purposes, including self-defense within the home
- DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER
Because Heller conceded at oral argument that the D C licensing law is permissible if it is not enforced arbitrarily and capriciously, the Court assumes that a license will satisfy his prayer for relief and does not address the licensing requirement
- U. S. Reports: District of Columbia et al. v. Heller, 554 U. S. 570 (2008).
U S Reports: District of Columbia et al v Heller, 554 U S 570 (2008)
- District of Columbia v. Heller - CaseBriefs
The District of Columbia has a ban on handguns, and in addition prohibits them from being in the home unless they are disabled Respondent Heller brings an action claiming that this complete ban violates the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms
- District of Columbia v. Heller - SCOTUSblog
Assuming he is not disqualified from exercising Second Amendment rights, the district must permit Heller to register his handgun and must issue him a license to carry it in the home Judgment: Affirmed, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Antonin Scalia on June 26, 2008
|
|
|