• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • McDonald v. Chicago: An Exclusive Interview

    After helping to strike down the Chicago handgun ban, the winners in today’s Supreme Court decision promised, in an exclusive interview with the Heritage Foundation, that more such cases would be coming in the next few weeks. Alan Gura, lead attorney for the plaintiffs, promised, “There will be future cases, I will be bringing cases in the days and weeks to come.” When asked about the decisions impact, he said, “We will see laws that serve no useful purpose other than to annoy gun owners struck down and others that are actually critically necessary for public safety upheld.”

    This morning, the Court sided with Gura and his client, 76 year old Otis McDonald. Otis had pursued the lawsuit after feeling that the city’s ban left him defenseless. In our interview, Gura, McDonald and Second Amendment Foundation founder Alan Gottlieb shared their thoughts on the freshly minted decision and explained the impact it will have on Chicago and the rest of the country. Earlier this year, after the case was argued before the Court, Gura and Gottlieb  sat down for an interview describing their strategy and hopes for the Court’s decision. Much of their prediction came true in today’s victory.

    Elsewhere on the Foundry, Heritage scholars have provided their analysis of the Court’s decision and the ramifications it should have on Elena Kagan’s nomination to the Supreme Court.

    Posted in First Principles [slideshow_deploy]

    8 Responses to McDonald v. Chicago: An Exclusive Interview

    1. Pingback: » Links To Visit – 06/28/10 NoisyRoom.net: The Progressive Hunter

    2. Joan Phillips says:

      I posted this on Tea Party Nation yesterday and received a reply that is one of the best I have ever read. He states that this "never should have risen to such lofty heights" but should have been thrown out by the lower courts. Please go to the link given below.

      The New York Times

      Mon, June 28, 2010 — 10:29 AM ET


      Justices Rule That 2nd Amendment Also Governs State and Local Gun Laws

      The Supreme Court ruled, 5-4, that the Second Amendment,

      which forbids Congress from infringing the right to keep and

      bear arms, applies to state and local governments as well.

      The case, McDonald v. Chicago, No. 08-1521, involved a

      challenge to the City of Chicago's gun control law, regarded

      as among the strictest in the nation. The justices did not

      strike down the Chicago law directly, but remanded the case

      to a lower court for review, where it appeared likely to be

      struck down under today's decision.


    3. Pingback: Morning Bell: The Dodd-Frank Assault on Economic Recovery

    4. Dr Jack Ryan says:

      If I could speak to the four justices who voted against McDonald, I'd like to ask them "what part of the second clause of the 2nd Amendment don't you understand?" In part it states "the right of THE PEOPLE to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed". Well, he11s bells, Justices, who do you think "the people" are? Notice also, that "the right of the people" is stated in the 1st, 2nd, 4th, and the 9th mentions "the people". So, logically. Why would a supreme court justice not see that "the people" means the same in all 4 mentioned amendments? .

    5. Lorenzo Gonzales, Ca says:

      What I fear the most is that the second amendment was save with a vote of 5-4,if the Supreme Court is to fallow the law of the land it has shown the American people that their are four judges who want to get rid of our Constitution. It is time to fight for what is ours, no more pushing us around from the first to the last amendment

    6. Melissa Valdosta says:

      This is not fantastic. The vote should have been 9 in favor of the second amendment not just a paltry 5.

    7. kalb says:

      ??Le courant serpente entre les prairies parfum??es, Les arbres fleuris deviennent neigeux souscharms/schmuck/thomas sabo les rayons argent??s; Dans l'air qui semble condens??, se meut le givre Qui voile les rives sablonneuses, ?? peine distinctes.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.