The National Rifle Association (NRA) filed an amicus curiae brief in support of the petitioners (Heller) in District of Columbia v. Heller. The NRA’s brief argued that the Second Amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, independent of service in a state militia. Here are the key points:

• Second Amendment Text and History: The NRA emphasized the original meaning of the Second Amendment, highlighting the importance of an armed citizenry for national defense. They argued that the amendment’s framers intended for individuals to possess firearms for both military and non-military purposes, including self-defense within the home.

• Individual vs. Collective Right: The NRA challenged the interpretation of the Second Amendment as solely protecting the right of states to maintain militias. They argued that the amendment protects an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, unconnected to militia service.

• Unconstitutionality of D.C. Gun Ban: The NRA argued that the District of Columbia’s handgun ban and trigger lock requirement violated the Second Amendment. They contended that these restrictions made it impossible for law-abiding citizens to exercise their right to self-defense with a functional firearm readily available in their homes.

• Scope of the Right: While acknowledging reasonable regulations on firearms, the NRA argued that the Second Amendment protects the right to possess a broad range of commonly used firearms for lawful purposes.

• Precedents and Analogy: The NRA cited historical Supreme Court cases that supported an individual right to bear arms and drew analogies to other fundamental rights protected by the Bill of Rights.

In essence, the NRA’s brief aimed to convince the Supreme Court to recognize a clear individual right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment, with limitations on unreasonable restrictions like the D.C. handgun ban.

Answering the Questions

1. Does the NRA want the U.S. Supreme Court to affirm or overrule the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit’s opinion?

The NRA wants the Supreme Court to overrule the D.C. Circuit’s opinion. The Circuit Court had upheld the District of Columbia’s handgun ban and trigger lock requirement. The NRA argued that these restrictions violated the Second Amendment’s individual right to bear arms.

2. Why?

The NRA desired a Supreme Court ruling that would establish a nationwide precedent recognizing an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, independent of service in a state militia. This would weaken gun control measures like the D.C. handgun ban and potentially influence future legal challenges to gun control laws.