Landmark Case Evaluation

Fill in the notes for the landmark case you selected to connect with your topic in
the previous lessons. You may use the official court documents for the case and
articles written about the case to fill in the required information below.

Basic Information

Title of landmark case(including case number): McDonald v. Chicago (2010) No.

08–1521
Plaintiff: Otis McDonald

Defendant: City of Chicago

Date case argued and decided: Mar 2, 2010- Jun 28, 2010

Judgment Affirmed or Reversed: Affirmed (5-4)

Case Evaluation

Write three to five complete sentences to respond to each of the following items.

In your own words, explain the issue/charges being discussed: The case
emerged when a couple of Chicago occupants tested a city statute that
adequately prohibited the ownership of handguns. Like in the District of
Columbia, Chicago restricted handguns by expecting them to be enrolled while
declining to issue any enlistments. Otis McDonald, a resigned support engineer
and a tracker, lawfully possessed shotguns. Be that as it may, he suspected they
were clumsy in case of a burglary, thus he needed to buy and enroll a handgun
to protect his home. In 2008, McDonald joined three other Chicago inhabitants in
a claim to challenge Chicago's handgun ban as an infringement of their Second
Amendment rights.

In your own words, describe or explain the evidence presented during the
arguments: The Court's conclusion, composed by Justice Alito, contended that
the individual appropriate to keep and remain ready for self-defense is
"profoundly established" and "crucial" to the American perfect of freedom, and
that handguns were simply the "quintessential protection weapon." The Court
likewise struck down Chicago's necessity to keep handguns in the home emptied
and inoperable, contending that it meddled with the legitimate utilization of
handguns for self-protection.
In your own words, summarize the conclusions of the judge/judges: Justice
Antonin Scalia agreed. He concurred with the Court's assessment, however
composed independently to differ with Justice John Paul Stevens'
contradiction.Justice Clarence Thomas agreed and agreed in the judgment. He
concurred that the Fourteenth Amendment consolidates the Second Amendment
against the states, however differ that the Due Process Clause was the fitting
component. Rather, Justice Thomas pushed that the Privileges or Immunities
Clause was the more suitable road for rights joining. Justice John Paul Stevens
contradicted. He differ that the Fourteenth Amendment joins the Second
Amendment against the states. He contended that owning an individual gun was
not a "freedom" intrigue ensured by the Due Process Clause. Justice Stephen G.
Breyer, joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Sonia Sotomayor,
additionally disagreed. He contended that there is nothing in the Second
Amendment's "content, history, or hidden reason" that portrays it as a "principal
right" justifying fuse through the Fourteenth Amendment.

Explain the connection between the amendment and personal freedom topic for
your informative/explanatory article: The Second Amendment of the United
States Constitution peruses: "An all around controlled Militia, being important to
the security of a free State, the privilege of the individuals to keep and remain
battle ready, will not be encroached." Second Amendment haven alludes to goals
embraced by certain locales in the United States to not exhaust assets to uphold
certain weapon control estimates apparent as infringement of the Second
Amendment.