Question: Which Supreme Court case addressed more Amendments of the US Constitution, District of Columbia v. Heller or Gibbons v. Ogden?

full_context: Document 1: Stephen Halbrook: Stephen P. Halbrook is a Senior Fellow at the Independent Institute and an author and lawyer known for his litigation on behalf of the National Rifle Association. He has written extensively about the original meanings of the Second Amendment and the Fourteenth Amendment (the latter as applied to Second Amendment rights). He has argued and won three cases before the US Supreme Court: "Printz v. United States", "United States v. Thompson-Center Arms Company", and "Castillo v. United States". He has also written briefs in many other cases, including the Supreme Court cases "Small v. United States" (pertaining to the Gun Control Act of 1968) and "McDonald v. Chicago". In "District of Columbia v. Heller", he wrote a brief on behalf of the majority of both houses of Congress. More broadly, his decades of research on the Second Amendment contributed to the intellectual foundation of the "Heller" decision. He has written many books and articles on the topic of gun control, some of which have been cited in Supreme Court opinions ("Heller", "McDonald", "Printz v. United States"). He has testified before congress on multiple occasions. Halbrook’s most important scholarly contribution, however, was the book "That Every Man Be Armed", originally published in 1986. The book was the most thorough analysis of the legal history and original intent of the Second Amendment.
Document 2: Slaughter-House Cases: The Slaughter-House Cases, 83 U.S. 36 (1873) , was the first United States Supreme Court interpretation of the U.S. Constitution's Fourteenth Amendment which had recently been enacted. It was a pivotal case in early civil rights law and held that the Fourteenth Amendment protects the privileges or immunities of citizenship of the United States, not privileges and immunities of citizenship of a state. However, federal rights of citizenship were then few, such as the right to travel between states and to use navigable rivers; the amendment did not protect the far broader range of rights covered by state citizenship. In effect, the amendment was interpreted to convey limited protection pertinent to a small minority of rights.
Document 3: District of Columbia v. Heller: District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) , is a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held, in a 5–4 decision, that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home, and that Washington, D.C.'s handgun ban and requirement that lawfully-owned rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock" violated this guarantee. Due to Washington, D.C.'s special status as a federal district, the decision did not address the question of whether the Second Amendment's protections are incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment against the states, which was addressed two years later by "McDonald v. City of Chicago" (2010) in which it was found that they are. It was the first Supreme Court case to decide whether the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.
Document 4: Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975: The Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975 was passed by the District of Columbia city council on September 24, 1976. The law banned residents from owning handguns, automatic firearms, or high-capacity semi-automatic firearms, as well as prohibited possession of unregistered firearms. Exceptions to the ban were allowed for police officers and guns registered before 1976. The law also required firearms kept in the home to be "unloaded, disassembled, or bound by a trigger lock or similar device"; this was deemed to be a prohibition on the use of firearms for self-defense in the home. On June 26, 2008, in the historic case of "District of Columbia v. Heller", the Supreme Court of the United States determined that the ban and trigger lock provisions violate the Second Amendment.
Document 5: Gibbons v. Ogden: Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1 (1824), was a landmark decision in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the power to regulate interstate commerce, granted to Congress by the Commerce Clause of the United States Constitution, encompassed the power to regulate navigation. The case was argued by some of America's most admired and capable attorneys at the time. Exiled Irish patriot Thomas Addis Emmet and Thomas J. Oakley argued for Ogden, while U.S. Attorney General William Wirt and Daniel Webster argued for Gibbons.
Document 6: Lemmon v. New York: Lemmon v. New York, or Lemmon v. The People, popularly known as the Lemmon Slave Case, was a proceeding initiated in 1852 by a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, which was granted by the Superior Court in New York City and eventually affirmed by the New York Court of Appeals in 1860 on the eve of the Civil War. The result of issuing the writ was the release of eight slaves including six children, who were brought into New York by their Virginia slave owners, while in transit during relocation to Texas. John Jay (namesake of his grandfather, the diplomat for the Continental Congress and again during the Washington Administration, former Governor of New York and first Chief Justice of the United States) was the guiding spirit behind the litigation. The attorney for the state on appeal (prosecuting for the release of the slaves) was Chester A. Arthur (future president of the United States). Counsel to him were William M. Evarts, Joseph Blunt and Erastus D. Culver.
Document 7: Robert A. Levy: Robert A. Levy (born 1941 in Washington, DC) is the chairman of the libertarian Cato Institute and the organizer and financier behind "District of Columbia v. Heller", the Supreme Court Case that established the Second Amendment as affirming an individual right to gun ownership. He is a Cato senior fellow and an author and pundit. Before becoming a lawyer, he was the founder and CEO of CDA Investment Technologies.
Document 8: Guy Montag Doe v. San Francisco Housing Authority: Guy Montag Doe v. San Francisco Housing Authority is a lawsuit filed by the National Rifle Association the day after the United States Supreme Court decided in "District of Columbia v. Heller" that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protects an individual's right to possess a firearm for private use. The complaint against San Francisco challenges the city's ban of guns in public housing.
Document 9: Corfield v. Coryell: Corfield v. Coryell (6 Fed. Cas. 546, no. 3,230 C.C.E.D.Pa. 1823) is a landmark 1823 federal circuit court case decided by Justice Bushrod Washington, sitting as a judge for the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In it, he upheld a New Jersey regulation forbidding non-residents from gathering oysters and clams against a challenge that New Jersey's law violated the Article IV Privileges and Immunities Clause and that the New Jersey law regulated interstate commerce in violation of the Commerce Clause. The case is available in Thayer's Cases on Constitutional Law, Part 2
Document 10: McCulloch v. Maryland: McCulloch v. Maryland, 17 U.S. 316 (1819) , was a landmark decision by the Supreme Court of the United States. The state of Maryland had attempted to impede operation of a branch of the Second Bank of the United States by imposing a tax on all notes of banks not chartered in Maryland. Though the law, by its language, was generally applicable to all banks not chartered in Maryland, the Second Bank of the United States was the only out-of-state bank then existing in Maryland, and the law was recognized in the court's opinion as having specifically targeted the Bank of the United States. The Court invoked the Necessary and Proper Clause of the Constitution, which allowed the Federal government to pass laws not expressly provided for in the Constitution's list of express powers, provided those laws are in useful furtherance of the express powers of Congress under the Constitution.
Document 11: General Survey Act: The General Survey Act was a law passed by the United States Congress in April 1824, which authorized the president to have surveys made of routes for transport roads and canals "of national importance, in a commercial or military point of view, or necessary for the transportation of public mail." While such infrastructure of national scope had been discussed and shown wanting for years, its passage shortly followed the landmark Supreme Court ruling, Gibbons v. Ogden, which first established federal authority over interstate commerce including navigation by river. The president assigned responsibility for the surveys to the Corps of Engineers (USACE).
Document 12: United States v. Wheeler (1920): United States v. Wheeler, 254 U.S. 281 (1920), is an 8-to-1 ruling by the Supreme Court of the United States that held that the Constitution alone did not grant the federal government the power to prosecute kidnappers, and only the states had the authority to punish a private citizen's unlawful violation of another's freedom of movement. The case was a landmark interpretation of the Privileges and Immunities Clause of the Constitution, and contained a classic legal statement of the right to travel which continues to undergird American jurisprudence.
Document 13: Joseph Story: Joseph Story (September 18, 1779 – September 10, 1845) was an American lawyer and jurist who served on the Supreme Court of the United States from 1811 to 1845. He is most remembered for his opinions in "Martin v. Hunter's Lessee" and "The Amistad" case, and especially for his magisterial "Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States", first published in 1833. Dominating the field in the 19th century, this work is a cornerstone of early American jurisprudence. It is the second comprehensive treatise on the provisions of the U.S. Constitution and remains a critical source of historical information about the forming of the American republic and the early struggles to define its law.
Document 14: Dred Scott v. Sandford: Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. 393 (1857) , also known simply as the Dred Scott case, was a landmark decision by the United States Supreme Court on US labor law and constitutional law. It held that "a negro, whose ancestors were imported into [the U.S.], and sold as slaves", whether enslaved or free, could not be an American citizen and therefore had no standing to sue in federal court, and that the federal government had no power to regulate slavery in the federal territories acquired after the creation of the United States. Dred Scott, an enslaved man of "the negro African race" who had been taken by his owners to free states and territories, attempted to sue for his freedom. In a 7–2 decision written by Chief Justice Roger B. Taney, the court denied Scott's request. The decision was only the second time that the Supreme Court had ruled an Act of Congress to be unconstitutional.
Document 15: Chamber of Commerce of the State of New York: The New York Chamber of Commerce, founded in 1768 by twenty New York City merchants, was the first commercial organization of its kind in the country. Attracting the participation of a number of New York's most influential business leaders, such as John Jacob Astor, Peter Cooper, and J. Pierpont Morgan, its members were instrumental in the realization of several key initiatives in the region - including the Erie Canal, the Atlantic cable, and the New York City Transit Authority. The Chamber of Commerce survives today as the Partnership for New York City, which was formed from the 2002 merger of the New York Chamber of Commerce and Industry and the New York City Partnership.
ground_truth: District of Columbia v. Heller