ipl-logo

Essay On Mcdonald's Second Amendment

468 Words2 Pages

Article III of the United States Constitution delineates the role of our Judicial Branch of Government to afford justice to all people. Indeed, ”To the letter of the law” leaves many in the legal system scratching their heads over their obligations to translate, as well as, deliver justice. Unfortunately, as society evolves, the parameters of any written laws may be construed differently and our judicial system is put to task in arbitrating the rights and restrictions of citizens. One such case, McDonald v. Chicago, captivated the nation in 2010 regarding the 2nd Amendment to the constitution. Clearly stated, the 2nd Amendment reads, “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed”. Otis McDonald would find himself at the forefront of a controversial, …show more content…

Justices Alito, Thomas, Kennedy, Roberts and Scalia collectively agreed the details immersed within the 14th Amendment assisted in their adjudicating the case. “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States:…….” On the contrary, dissenting opinions of Justices Stevens, Breyer , Ginsberg and Souter failed to sway the others, leaving the majority on the side of McDonald. All things considered, justice for every U.S. citizen remains at the forefront of societal concerns. Along with the Constitution, the Supreme Court Justices are diligent in defining and conveying laws. Our 2nd Amendment right, coupled with the 14th Amendment framed Otis McDonald’s legal case against the city of Chicago, resulting in a judgment supporting McDonald ‘s right to purchase a gun in a city rejecting any permitting of such

Show More
Related
624 Words | 3 Pages

In my first case, I will analyze the Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. In this case, in a 5-4 decision, the Court overrules its decision in United States v. Miller, in which, it stated that the Second Amendment only protects the right to keep and bear arms in relation with service in a well-regulated, government sponsored militia. In the majority opinion of Heller, Scalia divides the Second Amendment into two parts: the prefatory clause and the operative clause. The prefatory clause is the first half of the Second Amendment, it reads: “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,” while the operative clause is the second half of the Amendment: “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall

Read More
789 Words | 4 Pages

In 1803 the Supreme Court which was led by a great man by the name of John Marshall chose a controversial case to take on that is still examined today by many. It is one of the most famous cases and goes by the name of Marbury vs Madsion. Now the question was whether a demonstration offensive to the constitution can turn into the tradition that must be abided by is an inquiry profoundly intriguing to the United States; however, not of an unpredictability proportioned to its advantage. It appears to be just important to perceive certain standards, expected to have been long and settled. The first argument was that the people have the original right to establish a constitution for now and, for the future generations.

Read More
533 Words | 3 Pages

Through court cases like District of Columbia v. Heller, the Second Amendment was clarified to extend the right to possess firearms for “traditionally lawful purposes” from simply militia related services. McDonald v. Chicago further expanded the application of the Second Amendment by holding that it was applicable to states through the Fourteenth Amendment. Furthermore, these two cases were tied together as the Supreme Court held in District of Columbia v. Heller that the right to self-defense was a “fundamental” and “deeply rooted” right which in turn allowed the Supreme Court to rule that based on the 14th Amendment and the precedent established in the Heller case that the 2nd Amendment’s guarantee of the right to bear arms was applicable to states for the purpose of self-defense. There are three

Read More
563 Words | 3 Pages

In the past, certain principles of the Supreme Court in accordance with the Fourth Amendment changed with each Chief Justice. Between the years 1953 and 2005, there had been three of them, each modifying the main focus and making exceptions to searches and seizures by police. Their names were Chief Justice Earl Warren, Warren E. Burger, and William H Rehnquist. With each alternation of each of them came the names referring to the Supreme Court for those time periods. First, the Warren Court, focused on bringing attention to the exclusionary rule in order to protect citizens from being charged with ilegally-obtained evidence.

Read More
719 Words | 3 Pages

Incorporation Doctrine and McDonald v. Chicago The McDonald v. Chicago case was a crucial decision by the Supreme Court regarding the 2nd Amendment and state law. This case is interesting for a couple of reasons in my opinion. Firstly, the case revolves around legislation of the 2nd Amendment which is a right held dear to myself and many other Americans. Secondly, the case gives an example of the incorporation doctrine being fully applied.

Read More
276 Words | 2 Pages

January 14, 1990 appearing in Parade Magazine the article ‘The Right to Bear Arms’ by Warren E. Burger, Chief Justice of the United States, discusses gun violence in America, Gun regulations, and the Constitution. In the article Burger brings to light the massacres and deaths to support his stance on gun regulations, while supporting how important guns are to the American people. He mentions in his article the difference between “Saturday night Specials” and sporting guns, the state militias, and the history of 13 original colonies to show reader’s supporting facts and statistics for why America is needing gun regulations. “Many of our large centers have up to 10 times the murder rate of all of Western Europe. In 1988, there were 9000 handgun

Read More
1570 Words | 7 Pages

In Federalist No. 78, Alexander Hamilton lays out his vision for how the Supreme Court of the United States should function. In it, he assures that one of the key roles of the Supreme Court will be to check the constitutionality of congressional legislation in order to protect the individual rights of the people. However, in his opinion for the Marbury v. Madison case in 1803, Chief Justice John Marshall interprets the power of judicial review from Article III of the constitution, in a way in which the court becomes a powerful branch of government. With Marshall’s interpretation, the court is able to declare null legislation if it contradicts the constitution. Hamilton did not intend for the court to have the power to nullify legislation, but

Read More
1213 Words | 5 Pages

Miranda vs. Arizona Introduction The Supreme Court case of Miranda vs. Arizona (1966) was a significant case for both law enforcement agencies and the citizens of America. This case would be the milestone that changed how law enforcement agencies handled citizens that were being detained for crimes that were committed. The results from this case have been constantly reviewed and gained further information on how the Fourth, Fifth, and Sixth Amendments are interpreted. While this was not the first case that brought up violations of Constitutional Rights, this case would set a standard that future Supreme Court Justices would have to uphold.

Read More
903 Words | 4 Pages

The Constitution is an essential document to not only the American judiciary system, but to American society as well. Though the document’s intended purpose is to protect the people, it has caused much controversy among them. The controversy arises in the argument of how the people should be interpreting the text of the Constitution. Originalists argue the text is meant to be interpreted in the literal sense, instrumentalists oppose this view arguing that the text of the Constitution is meant to be interpreted in relevance to today (adapted to modern times). This argument is discussed by Lawrence B. Solum in parts one and two of, “The Supreme Court in Bondage: Constitutional Stare Decisis, Legal Formalism, and the Future of Unenumerated Rights”.

Read More
854 Words | 4 Pages

amendment is also not granted by the US constitution. To many people, the second amendment is not clear. It confuses a lot in that some people argue that those that have the rights to possess firearms for self-defense are only the military. It does not specify that the citizens have the right to own firearms for self-defense and personal use. A study conducted by a Yale Professor showed that the “shall-issue” laws resulted in a rise in the rates of the violence, crimes, rape, and robbery hence with this it could be concluded that ownership of firearms by citizens lead to an increase in the crime rates.

Read More
711 Words | 3 Pages

If the 1st amendment never came to pass then the U.S. and most likely the world would be much different. The U.S. would probably be more focused on maintaining the Christian religion to the point of war. Which will leave the U.S. very vulnerable and we will definitely not be the land of the free. In regards to the most recent presidential election, I believe there needs to be a mandatory test you have to pass in order to vote.

Read More
258 Words | 2 Pages

In the First amendment, we are guaranteed the freedom of speech, petition, assembly, religion, and press. There is three of these rights that are most important to me which are religion, speech, and assembly. We are guaranteed these rights; however, there is circumstances. First, I feel like religion is an important right because without freedom of religion, the government set religion might not be correct and would lead others away from the truth.

Read More
927 Words | 4 Pages

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, for instance, enshrines the right to bear arms as a means to safeguard personal freedom and protect against tyranny. Stricter gun control measures may infringe upon this constitutional right and erode the autonomy of law-abiding citizens. Restricting access to firearms disproportionately affects law-abiding citizens who rely on guns for self-defense, hunting, or sport shooting. It is essential to recognize that responsible gun ownership should not be penalized due to the actions of a few individuals who misuse

Read More
1577 Words | 7 Pages

Rights are what we expect to have while privilege may require permission or one may have to work towards achieving it. “The right to bear arms” today has become a controversial topic when identifying its real meaning. This topic has been argued specifically as it refers to the right to own firearm as an individual or as “a well regulated militia” according to the Second Amendment. This argument was put to rest when Supreme Court ruled in favor of Heller in the District of Columbia vs. Heller case.

Read More
760 Words | 4 Pages

According to the Second Amendment in the Constitution, the citizens have the right to possess and bear arms. However, this has remained an important issue since decades. Issues such as gun control and gun rights have remained a matter of debate and have been lobbying around in the Congress meetings. It has been shown that the Congress is compelled to draft a particular enactment keeping in mind the end goal to prepare a strict law against unlawful utilization of arms, and just having them for a good reason. The following paper explains gun control and gun rights in the United States of America.

Read More

More about Essay On Mcdonald's Second Amendment

Related Topics

Open Document