The Supreme Court's constitutional literalists will have their hands full with the Court's
first Second Amendment case
since 1939. If the job of the Court is to interpret the text, then why has it spent so much more time on grammatical gems of clarity like the
Eighth Amendment and so little on the Second?
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Clear enough, right? What part of "Arms" or "Militia" or "people" don't you understand? Some people, of course, have no doubt about what it means.