June 26 marks the 15th anniversary of the landmark 2008 Supreme Court ruling in District of Columbia v. Dick Anthony Heller, and it is an occasion American gun owners can celebrate because it led to two other important rulings, McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010) and New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), both of which have given headaches to proponents of citizen disarmament.

While Heller—authored by the late Associate Justice Antonin Scalia—affirmed the individual right to keep and bear arms, and have a handgun in the home for personal protection, the later rulings expanded (many would argue restored) the Second Amendment to protect the right from municipal prohibitions and incorporate the amendment to the states via the 14th Amendment. And last year's Bruen ruling made it clear the right to bear arms extends beyond the doorway of one's home.

As if to underscore the establishment media's approach to the Second Amendment, NBC News published a report last week about how lower courts have been interpreting and applying the high court's new guidelines for determining gun rights cases.

That report noted, "The decision by the Supreme Court's 6-3 conservative majority has led to a flurry of challenges to long-standing laws — both federal and state — and prompted some judges to find they are unlawful under the new standard. Other judges have upheld gun restrictions, creating divisions on the law across the country. It has also led to blue states passing a new wave of gun laws in the hope that they will not fall foul of the Supreme Court's rationale."

And just what is the "new standard?"

"The new test the Supreme Court adopted in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen requires judges to focus solely on whether a law comports with a historical understanding of the Second Amendment," NBC explained.