What was the question before the Court in McDonald v. Chicago?
Asked by: Marcel DuBuque PhD | Last update: February 5, 2026Score: 4.4/5 (71 votes)
The main question in McDonald v. Chicago (2010) was whether the Second Amendment's right to keep and bear arms applies to state and local governments, or if it only limits the federal government, with the Court ultimately deciding it applies to states via the Fourteenth Amendment's Due Process Clause. The case challenged Chicago's handgun ban, asking if the individual right established in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) extended beyond federal action to state and local laws.
What is the legal question in McDonald v. Chicago?
This case raises the question of whether the same restriction applies to state governments. McDonald argues that the right to bear arms is a fundamental right that states should not be able to infringe. Chicago argues that states should be able to tailor firearm regulation to local conditions.
What was the majority opinion in McDonald v. Chicago 2010?
Holding: The Second Amendment right of individuals to keep and bear arms in self defense applies against state and local governments as well as the federal government. Judgment: Reversed and remanded, 5-4, in an opinion by Justice Samuel Alito on June 28, 2010.
What was the main conclusion of DC v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago?
District of Columbia, 478 F. 3d 370, 401 (2007). It held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess firearms and that the city's total ban on handguns, as well as its requirement that firearms in the home be kept nonfunctional even when necessary for self-defense, violated that right.
What did the Supreme Court rule in McDonald v. Chicago quizlet?
In McDonald v. Chicago (2010), the United States Supreme Court stated that, "[s]elf-defense is a basic right, recognized by many legal systems from ancient times to the present day" and that an individual's right to bear arms was "deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition."
McDonald v. Chicago, EXPLAINED [AP Gov Required Supreme Court Cases]
Who won the Court case McDonald v. Chicago?
Significance: In a 5–4 decision, the Supreme Court of the United States decided that the Second Amendment protection of the right to bear arms applied to states and localities. This decision did not overturn the relevant city ordinances but returned the case to the Seventh Circuit to decide that issue.
What guns are not protected by the 2nd Amendment?
So, machine guns, the Supreme Court has said, can be banned. In Heller it said M-16s and the like can be banned and so machine gunsl, even if they were say frequently used by sport shooters, they would still not get constitutional protection because they're dangerous and they're unusual.
What was the legal question in DC v. Heller?
When the Supreme Court took up DC vs Heller, it had to answer the question of whether or not the Second Amendment protected an “individual” right to bear arms. By a 5-4 ruling, the court declared that it did. Such a ruling is, of course, within the purview of the Supreme Court.
What are the dissenting opinions in the case?
A dissenting opinion refers to an opinion written by an appellate judge or Supreme Court Justice who disagrees with the majority opinion in a given case. A party who writes a dissenting opinion is said to dissent.
What was the long-term impact of McDonald's v. Chicago?
The McDonald decision has had a profound impact on the interpretation of the Second Amendment and on the regulation of guns. By applying the right to bear arms to the states, the Supreme Court constrained the extent to which state and local governments can regulate firearms.
Which statement accurately summarizes the impact of the McDonald's v. Chicago 2010 decision?
Based on this analysis, the most accurate summary of the impact of the McDonald v. Chicago decision is that it incorporated an individual's right to bear arms for self-defense and made it apply to state and local governments.
Why should we protect the 2nd Amendment?
It has preserved the right of the American people to protect ourselves, our families, and our freedoms since the founding of our great Nation. Because it is foundational to maintaining all other rights held by Americans, the right to keep and bear arms must not be infringed.
What is the due process clause?
Due process (or due process of law) primarily refers to the concept found in the Fifth Amendment to the US Constitution, which says no one shall be "deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law" by the federal government.
What famous cases had strong dissents?
Looking back: Famous Supreme Court dissents
- Dred Scott v. Sandford, March 6, 1857: ...
- Plessy v. Ferguson, May 18, 1896: ...
- Olmstead v. United States, June 4, 1928: ...
- Minersville School District v. Gobitis, June 3, 1940: ...
- Korematsu v. United States, December 18, 1944: ...
- Abington School District v. ...
- FCC v. ...
- Lawrence v.
What effect did the Heller VDC and McDonald's v Chicago have on 2nd Amendment rights?
District of Columbia v Heller marked the first time the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Second Amendment right of an individual to own a firearm. In Heller, the Court struck the District of Columbia's ordinance that banned the possession of handguns and mandated all registered firearms be kept unloaded and locked.
When did DC ban guns?
This year, the U.S. Supreme Court will decide whether to overturn a lower court decision striking down the District of Columbia's 1976 handgun ban designed to reduce violent crime.