Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/07pdf/07-290.pdf
Page Number: 67

64 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA v. HELLER 

Opinion of the Court 

In  sum,  we  hold  that  the  District’s  ban  on  handgun
possession  in  the  home  violates  the  Second  Amendment, 
as  does  its  prohibition  against  rendering  any  lawful  fire­
arm  in  the  home  operable  for  the  purpose  of  immediate
self-defense.  Assuming  that  Heller  is  not  disqualified 
from  the  exercise  of  Second  Amendment  rights,  the  Dis­
trict  must  permit  him  to  register  his  handgun  and  must 
issue him a license to carry it in the home. 

* 

* 

* 

We are aware of the problem of handgun violence in this 
country, and we take seriously the concerns raised by the 
many  amici  who  believe  that  prohibition  of  handgun
ownership  is  a  solution.  The  Constitution  leaves  the 
District  of  Columbia  a  variety  of  tools  for  combating  that
problem,  including  some  measures  regulating  handguns, 
see  supra,  at  54–55,  and  n. 26.    But  the  enshrinement  of 
constitutional  rights  necessarily  takes  certain  policy
choices  off  the  table.  These  include  the  absolute  prohibi­
tion  of  handguns  held  and  used  for  self-defense  in  the 
home.  Undoubtedly  some  think  that  the  Second  Amend­
ment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is 
the  pride  of  our  Nation,  where  well-trained  police  forces 
provide  personal  security,  and  where  gun  violence  is  a 
serious  problem.  That  is  perhaps  debatable,  but  what  is
not  debatable  is  that  it  is  not  the  role  of  this  Court  to 
pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.

We affirm the judgment of the Court of Appeals. 

It is so ordered.