in Scalia's majority opinion in Heller, he stated:
"Although we do not undertake an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the Second Amendment, nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."
and yet the state of California's attorney, during oral argument in Nichols v. Brown, asserted that the right to bear arms does not extend beyond the interior of one's home. why then did Scalia waste words and not just say "forbidding the carrying of firearms outside of the home"?
Back to blog or home page
last updated 2018-08-02 02:53:27. served from tektonic