LAYING PRIVILEGES OR IMMUNITIES TO REST: MCDONALD V. CITY OF CHICAGO

Laying privileges or immunities to rest: McDonald v. City of Chicago

Abstract

In District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court held the Second Amendment prohibits the government from banning handguns. Following Heller, submission of the Second Amendment to state governments through the Fourteenth Amendment seemed likely. Although the Amendment's Framers mostly believed it would need states to uphold the individual liberties delineated in the Bill of Rights, state authorities have not been needed to do so following the Supreme Court's decision in the Slaughter-House Cases.

Introduction

The Court's allocate of certiorari in McDonald v. City of Chicago,3 however, could signal a departure from the Slaughter-House precedent.4 McDonald will consider whether the Privileges or Immunities Clause or the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporate the right to keep and bear arms, making the right binding against state governments. If the Court concerns the Second Amendment to the states through the Privileges or Immunities Clause and overturns Slaughter-House, the decision could hurl the living substantive due method framework into disarray because numerous rights would apply through both the Due Process and Privileges or Immunities clauses. (Milton P.19)

The Court, although, may use McDonald to clarify the existing Privileges or Immunities and Due method jurisprudence, which is presently in a state of confusion. Regardless of the exact outcome, McDonald will expect harden the legacy of the post-Civil conflict constitutional amendments on municipal liberties. (Michael P.15)

Facts

Chicago presented firearm guidelines that effectively banned handguns. In District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment prohibits the federal government from banning handguns kept at home. Immediately following Heller, Otis McDonald started an action demanding several long-standing Chicago ordinances that mostly ostracized handgun ownership inside city limits. McDonald claimed that the Chicago ordinances violated his Second Amendment right to bear arms as applied to state and local governments by the Fourteenth Amendment. (Saenz P.25)

The Seventh Circuit similarly declined to overrule its precedent in Quill icy. The U.S. Supreme Court allocated certiorari to work out if the Second Amendment right to hold and accept arms concerns to the states through either the Fourteenth Amendment's Privilege or Immunities Clause or the Fourteenth Amendment's Due method Clause. (Damie P.1)

Legal background

If the Court incorporates the Second Amendment, it could do so either through the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause or through the Amendment's Due method Clause. In either case, the Court's concern will be leveraged by its latest conclusion in Heller. A. Fourteenth Amendment Privileges or Immunities.

Following the Civil War, proponents of equal rights sought to create federal protections for fundamental civil liberties. Before the municipal conflict, the Supreme Court had opined that basic rights relish no government protection in three distinct cases. Cornfield v. Coryell held the item IV Privileges and Immunities Clause only creates a government cause of action where a state extends a right to its people while rejecting the right to people of other ...