3billion - Scholastic

t he
Gun riGhts
Second Amendment, which protects “the right of
the people to keep and bear arms,” is more than 200
years old, but it was not until last year that the Supreme
Court weighed in on how it applies to gun-control laws.
Many courts and scholars had long assumed that the
Amendment protected only a right to own guns tied to a
state militia. But the Supreme Court, in a 5-to-4 decision,
ruled that the Second Amendment protects a fundamental,
individual right.
The decision in District of Columbia v. Heller struck down
parts of Washington, D.C.’s gun-control law, the strictest in
the nation. But because the case came from the District of
Columbia and thus involved only federal law, the Court did
not resolve the important question of whether the Second
Amendment’s protections also apply to state and local laws.
The ruling also left open the question of whether the
Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to have a
gun for purposes beyond self-defense in the home.
“There is likely to be quite a flood of litigation to try
to flesh out precisely what regulations are to be permitted
and which ones are not,” says Robert A. Levy, a lawyer on
the winning side of the case.
t he
death Penalty & harsh sentences
Eighth Amendment prohibits “cruel and unusual
punishments,” but the legal definition of that phrase
has evolved over time as social standards have changed.
For example, the Supreme Court has narrowed the scope
of the death penalty several times in recent years, saying it
cannot be applied to juvenile offenders, the mentally retarded,
or people who commit crimes other than murder.
But the Court has shown no inclination to abolish capital
punishment. In fact, it upheld the use of lethal injection
even though there is some evidence that the chemicals used
in executions can produce extremely painful deaths.
This fall, the Court will consider two cases that question
whether the Eighth Amendment’s ban on cruel and
unusual punishment should extend to sentencing juvenile
offenders to life in prison without parole.
Questioning the constitutionality of life without parole
for juveniles is the logical next step following the court’s
2005 decision in Roper v. Simmons, which struck down the
death penalty for crimes committed by 16- and 17-year-olds.
last year, the
supreme court ruled
that the second
amendment protects
an individual’s right
to own a gun, but
it’s unclear how the
ruling will affect
state and local
gun-control laws.
Most state and local gun restrictions appear to be allowed
under the ruling, including licensing laws, limits on the
commercial sale of guns, restrictions on guns in places like
schools and government buildings, and prohibitions on the
possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill.
“The Heller case is a landmark decision that has not
changed very much at all,” says Adam Winkler, a law
professor at the University of California, Los Angeles.
“To date, the federal courts have not invalidated a single
gun-control law on the basis of the Second Amendment
since Heller.” •
Writing for the majority in that case, Justice Anthony M.
Kennedy said that even older teenagers are different from
adults: less mature, more impulsive, more susceptible to peer
pressure, and more likely to change for the better over time.
“The principles driving Roper,” says Douglas A. Berman,
a sentencing law expert at Ohio State University, “would
seem to suggest that its impact does not stop at the execution
chamber.” •
Joe sullivan, now 33,
was 13 when he was
convicted of raping a
72-year-old woman in
Florida and sentenced
to life in prison without
parole. the court will
consider whether life
without parole for
juveniles violates the
eighth amendment.
September 7, 2009 15