McDonald v. City of Chicago

TL;DR Summary

The Holding

Facts of the Case

The Plaintiffs

Otis McDonald, a 76-year-old retired maintenance engineer, lived in Chicago's Morgan Park neighborhood. He sought to keep a handgun in his home for self-defense against drug dealers and gangs that had taken over his neighborhood. Chicago law effectively banned handgun possession by almost all private citizens.

Other plaintiffs included:

• Adam Orlov - National Rifle Association member and former police officer
• Colleen Lawson - Chicago resident wanting home defense
• David Lawson - Colleen's husband
• Second Amendment Foundation and Illinois State Rifle Association

Chicago's Ordinances

Chicago's gun control regime included:

• Prohibition on possessing unregistered firearms
• Refusal to register handguns after 1982 (grandfather clause for pre-1982)
• Annual re-registration requirements with fees
• Prohibition on gun sales within city limits

Procedural History

After Heller struck down D.C.'s handgun ban, suits were filed against Chicago and Oak Park. The Seventh Circuit upheld the bans, bound by precedent that the Second Amendment didn't apply to states. The Supreme Court granted certiorari to resolve the incorporation question.

Plurality Opinion (Justice Alito)

The Incorporation Question

"Two years ago, in District of Columbia v. Heller, we held that the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of self-defense, and we struck down a District of Columbia law that banned the possession of handguns in the home. The city of Chicago and the village of Oak Park, a Chicago suburb, have laws that are similar to the District of Columbia's, but Chicago and Oak Park argue that their laws are constitutional because the Second Amendment has no application to the States. We have previously held that most of the provisions of the Bill of Rights apply with full force to both the Federal Government and the States. Applying the standard that is well established in our case law, we hold that the Second Amendment right is fully applicable to the States."

— Justice Alito, Plurality Opinion

Due Process Analysis

The plurality applied the established test for incorporation:

Fundamental Rights Test

"[W]e must decide whether the right to keep and bear arms is fundamental to our scheme of ordered liberty, or as we have said in a related context, whether this right is 'deeply rooted in this Nation's history and tradition.'"

Historical Evidence

The Court examined extensive historical evidence of the right's fundamental nature:

Founding Era

• Antifederalists feared federal disarmament of state militias
• Four states proposed Second Amendment analogues
• Ratifying conventions emphasized arms rights

Post-Civil War Period

"The right to keep and bear arms was considered no less fundamental by those who drafted and ratified the Bill of Rights' Fourteenth Amendment."

Evidence from Reconstruction:

• 1866 Freedmen's Bureau Act protected right to bear arms
• Civil Rights Act of 1866 aimed to protect arms rights
• Congressional debates show intent to protect Second Amendment
• Southern attempts to disarm freed slaves prompted federal action

Rejecting Alternatives

The Court rejected Chicago's arguments:

Public Safety Arguments

"Municipal respondents argue that although the right to keep and bear arms may have been fundamental at the time of ratification, the right has since lost this status due to changed circumstances... But the constitutional rights we have recognized are not subject to revocation based on public opposition or changed social conditions."

Federalism Concerns

Chicago argued incorporation would intrude on state police powers. The Court responded that incorporation always limits state power, but fundamental rights override federalism concerns.

Justice Thomas Concurrence

Privileges or Immunities Clause

Justice Thomas wrote separately to argue the Second Amendment should be incorporated through the Fourteenth Amendment's Privileges or Immunities Clause, not Due Process:

"I believe the Second Amendment is fully applicable to the States because the right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the Fourteenth Amendment as a privilege of American citizenship."

— Justice Thomas, Concurring

Critique of Substantive Due Process

Thomas criticized the substantive due process doctrine:

• No textual basis in Constitution
• Allows judges to impose policy preferences
• Privileges or Immunities provides clearer textual basis
• Historical evidence supports P&I incorporation

Dissenting Opinions

Justice Stevens' Dissent

Justice Stevens argued against incorporation:

• Firearms regulation traditionally a state/local matter
• No evidence Fourteenth Amendment intended to incorporate Second Amendment
• Liberty interest in self-defense doesn't require handguns
• States should experiment with gun regulations

"The idea that the Framers of the Fourteenth Amendment intended it to eliminate the ability of states to regulate firearms is implausible."

— Justice Stevens, Dissenting

Justice Breyer's Dissent

Justice Breyer, joined by Ginsburg and Sotomayor, emphasized:

• History doesn't clearly support incorporation
• Urban crime justifies local experimentation
• Courts ill-equipped to evaluate gun regulations
• Democratic process should determine local gun laws

"In sum, the Framers did not write the Second Amendment in order to protect a private right of armed self-defense. There has been, and is, no consensus that the right is, or was, 'fundamental.'"

— Justice Breyer, Dissenting

Incorporation Doctrine Explained

What Is Incorporation?

Incorporation is the legal doctrine by which Bill of Rights protections apply to state and local governments through the Fourteenth Amendment. Originally, the Bill of Rights only restricted the federal government.

Selective Incorporation History

The Court has gradually incorporated most Bill of Rights provisions:

Why McDonald Was Necessary After Heller

• Heller only applied to federal enclaves (D.C.)
• States weren't bound by Heller without incorporation
• Most gun regulations are state/local
• Incorporation essential for meaningful Second Amendment protection

Impact & Significance

Immediate Effects

• Chicago required to allow handgun possession
• Oak Park's ban also invalidated
• Similar bans nationwide became unconstitutional
• States must respect Heller's individual right interpretation

Broader Legal Impact

Completed Bill of Rights Incorporation

McDonald essentially completed the incorporation process. Nearly all Bill of Rights provisions now apply to states.

Standard of Review Questions

Like Heller, McDonald didn't specify the level of constitutional scrutiny for Second Amendment claims, leading to continued litigation until Bruen (2022).

Litigation Explosion

McDonald triggered numerous challenges to state and local gun laws:

• Assault weapon bans
• Magazine capacity limits
• Concealed carry restrictions
• Purchase waiting periods
• Age restrictions

What Remains Constitutional

The Court reaffirmed Heller's list of "presumptively lawful" regulations:

• Background checks
• Concealed carry regulations
• Sensitive places restrictions
• Commercial sales regulations
• Prohibitions for dangerous persons

Citations & Resources