District of Columbia v. Heller
- Decided
- June 26, 2008
- Docket
- 07-290
- Status
- Published
- Jurisdiction
- Federal
Cited 3,086 timesNo negative treatment found in this library
What later courts said
- holding that individuals have a right to keep and bear arms for the purposes of self-defense — In re N.G. (2019)
- holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for private use — Ramirez-Altamirano v. Holder (2009)
- recognizing that the Second Amendment right is “not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose” — Stephen Kolbe v. Lawrence Hogan, Jr. (2017)
Each line is a later court’s own words about this case, not a summary. Read the opinion before relying on it.
How the opinion begins
[*573] Justice Scalia delivered the opinion of the Court.
We consider whether a District of Columbia prohibition on the possession of usable handguns in the home violates the Second Amendment to the Constitution.
[*574] I The District of Columbia generally prohibits the possession of handguns. It is a crime to carry an unregistered [*575] firearm, and the registration of handguns is prohibited. See D. C. Code §§7-2501.01(12), 7-2502.01(a), 7-2502.02(a)(4) (2001). Wholly apart from that prohibition, no person may carry a handgun without a license, but the chief of police may issue licenses for 1-year periods. See §§22-4504(a), 22-4506. District of Columbia law also requires residents to keep their lawfully owned firearms, such as registered long guns, “unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock or similar device” unless they are located in a place of business or are being used for lawful recreational activities. See § 7-2507.02.[1]
Cite this
District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008)Read the full opinion
Reading the library on this site uses your account’s daily calls, the same as the connector and the API. The Free plan needs no card. Calls a day on each plan.