I'm reasonably confident of that outcome, but that's not the only thing at stake. There are several possibilities:dac1842 wrote:With the current make up of the Supreme Court this will probably go 5-4 in favor of the right of the individual to keep and bear arms.
Will they declare it a fundamental right, which would immediately void all gun control laws?
Will they declare it subject to "reasonable restrictions"?
Will they narrowly craft the decision to apply to only the DC ordinances?
As you can see, there's quite a range that the decision could cover. If they chose the last option, the only other jurisdiction that would be affected would be Chicago (DC and Chicago are the only places with total handgun bans).
There's also the problematic way in which they phrased the question:
“Whether the following provisions — D.C. Code secs. 7-2502.02(a)(4), 22-4504(a), and 7-2507.02 — violate the Second Amendment rights of individuals who are not affiliated with any state-regulated militia, but who wish to keep handguns and other firearms for private use in their homes?�
A "well-regulated militia" and a "state-regulated militia" mean wildly different things. The subtle shift in terminology could be very bad, or it could just be a sly way to address the real issue.
I guess we'll get a hint in April, when arguments are heard.