District of Columbia v. Heller
The Second Amendment is one of the most controversial amendments in the Constitution. There have been several cases where the Amendment has been challenged. As the world keeps growing and developing, the amendments have stayed the same since the creation in 1789. Therefore, as the years go by the original meaning of the text is getting lost in translation, which has caused the Supreme Court Justices to try to interpret the meaning the best way they can to ensure a fair trial. The case of the District of Columbia v. Heller in 1976 is the case in question. When the case was presented to the Supreme Court, the opinion of the court came from Justice Antonin Scalia.
In the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the case was about examining as to whether if the Second Amendment was violated for Dick Anthony Heller. The District of Columbia decided to create a gun control law, which placed a ban on handguns and if individuals did own a gun it had to adhere strictly to their guidelines on owning a weapon. Heller, at the time currently had a job as a Security …show more content…
The Original meaning is about interpreting what the meaning may have been during the time it was written. Justice Scalia tries to understand the Original meaning by “reading of [some] pre-Second Amendment states constitutional provisions is that they secured an individual right to bear arms for defensive purposes” (Epstein and Walker 385). In addition, breaking down other amendments to get a sense of the theme from the framers. For instance, the first amendment refers to the freedom that each individual has according to the document such as using the phrase “the rights of the people”. Therefore, his opinion was that a person has the right to bear arms if it is for defensive purposes. However, if the individual suffers with a mental illness than that person is unable to bear
The Second Amendment is one of the most controversial amendments in the Constitution. There have been several cases where the Amendment has been challenged. As the world keeps growing and developing, the amendments have stayed the same since the creation in 1789. Therefore, as the years go by the original meaning of the text is getting lost in translation, which has caused the Supreme Court Justices to try to interpret the meaning the best way they can to ensure a fair trial. The case of the District of Columbia v. Heller in 1976 is the case in question. When the case was presented to the Supreme Court, the opinion of the court came from Justice Antonin Scalia.
In the case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the case was about examining as to whether if the Second Amendment was violated for Dick Anthony Heller. The District of Columbia decided to create a gun control law, which placed a ban on handguns and if individuals did own a gun it had to adhere strictly to their guidelines on owning a weapon. Heller, at the time currently had a job as a Security …show more content…
The Original meaning is about interpreting what the meaning may have been during the time it was written. Justice Scalia tries to understand the Original meaning by “reading of [some] pre-Second Amendment states constitutional provisions is that they secured an individual right to bear arms for defensive purposes” (Epstein and Walker 385). In addition, breaking down other amendments to get a sense of the theme from the framers. For instance, the first amendment refers to the freedom that each individual has according to the document such as using the phrase “the rights of the people”. Therefore, his opinion was that a person has the right to bear arms if it is for defensive purposes. However, if the individual suffers with a mental illness than that person is unable to bear