The Sixth Ward - Supreme Court extends gun rights in Chicago case
So basically here is not only a story from Chicago Breaking News about the SCOTUS ruling, but also an indication of how city Aldermen will vote. Not only a possible no vote from one alderman indicated on the blog (which is a neighborhood blog for Chicago's Sixth Ward district), but also some possible yes votes in favor of gun rights for Chicago residents.
Clout City - Mayor Daley Vows to Put New Gun Regulations in Place But Won't Say What They Are
Well, this isn't a surprise a lot of articles in the lead up mentioned that Daley was considering a response to the expected ruling, but for some reason he's keeping his response close to his chest. That leads to the next link that came much earlier in the day.
Clout City - City Council to Consider New Gun Regulations Tuesday
This shouldn't be a big surprise. The fight over gun control in Chicago will not end with this ruling, but this link is of note because this may indicate another possible yes vote in favor of individual guns rights in Chicago.
Backyard Conservative - Isaac Hayes Lauds Court Decision for Chicago
Republican Issac Hayes is running against Democratic Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr. in his bid for Illinois' 2nd Congressional District seat.
Chicagoist - Supreme Court reverses city handgun ban
According to SCOTUSblog, the case is now remanded back to the Seventh Circuit of the United States Court of Appeals which upheld the ban last year after ruling that the 2nd Amendment did not apply to state and municipal laws.The Capitol Fax - This just in… SCOTUS rules against Chicago gun ban
A series of links and excerpts from various blogs and newspapers about this ruling and of course excerpts from press releases from those organizations for whom this ruling effects.
Here are some links provided by Instapundit
NY Times: Room for debate- What Bolstering Gun Rights Will Mean
The Instapundit himself made this comment there:
Most interesting to me about the Thomas opinion in McDonald is its frank recitation of the racist roots of gun control laws, which were intended to disarm blacks, especially after the Civil War and — in the case of New York’s Sullivan Law — sometimes recent immigrants as well. Justice Thomas relies heavily on Bob Cottrol and Ray Diamond’s pathbreaking article on this subject, which I highly recommend to interested readers.The Faculty Lounge: McDonald v. Chicago as Paradox
To understand the paradox, think of the two arguments Chicago made to the Supreme Court. First, Chicago argued that the Second Amendment is not incorporated via the Fourteenth Amendment’s Due Process Clause. Five of the nine Supreme Court Justices agreed with Chicago on this point -- Justice Stevens in his lone dissent; Justices Breyer, Ginsburg, and Sotomayor in Justice Breyer’s dissent; and Justice Thomas in his concurrence in the result. To be fair, Justice Thomas had a different reason for agreeing with Chicago than the others, but he ultimately agreed that the Due Process Clause does not incorporate the Second Amendment.Instapundit - Glenn Reynold's thoughts on the ruling in McDonald v. Chicago
Second, Chicago argued that the Second Amendment is not incorporated via the Fourteenth Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause. This argument was based on the 1873 Slaughter-House Cases, which seriously restricted the meaning of that clause. Although that decision has been criticized from all quarters, the Court has stuck to it, including eight Justices today. Those Justices relied on the Slaughter-House Cases, as well as the 1876 case of United States v. Cruikshank, which specifically said that the Second Amendment was not incorporated pursuant to the Privileges or Immunities Clause. The four Justices in the plurality stated that they “decline[d] to disturb” Slaughter-House, and the four dissenters followed the case as well. Only Justice Thomas argued for overturning Slaughter-House, saying that he “reject[s]” the case. He had more damning words for Cruikshank, saying that it “is not a precedent entitled to any respect.”
Thus, Chicago won 5-4 on its Due Process Clause argument and won 8-1 on its Privileges or Immunities Clause argument. Yet all the headlines are about a victory for gun rights.
Crain's Greg Hinz - 'Glorious day' for pro-gun forces—but is it really?
If there are more links of notes expect them tomorrow!