TexasCHLforum.com

I think it's clearly not going to be 9-0. I expect both Breyer and Stevens to be in the minority for sure. Sotomayor is a little harder to read, but if she stays true to her beliefs, she will join the minority as well. I think this decision may be like Heller - 5-4. Possibly 6-3 if Sotomayor or Souter joins the majority. I think Breyer seems bitter about losing Heller. At least he comes across that way to me. The only true wild card, in my mind, is Souter. He could switch to the majority if he thinks that Heller changed the game.

In any case, there are some intriguing things in Heller, and I think there will be more in McDonald. Remember, Heller retained the right of the city of Washington D.C. to require that the respondent obtain a license to have a gun in his home. The court hinted that the requirement might be too broad. Heller also 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."

What gets me most about the legal opposition that insists that the 2nd Amendment only applies to militia is that they fail to admit that even then citizens are allowed to keep and bear arms. If you concede that the militia clause is valid, how are the people supposed to get the guns to serve in the militia? From the government? Then you've completely divorced the prefatory clause from the operative clause. Somehow the guns necessary to serve in the militia are to magically appear when needed? It defies logic.