Privileges or Immunities
Randy Barnett looks at the Supreme Court handgun case, McDonald v Chicago:
"The evidence is clear that the privileges or immunities of citizens included those rights in the Bill of Rights. As Michigan's Sen. Jacob Howard explained to the Senate, these privileges or immunities included, among others, 'the personal rights guarantied and secured by the first eight amendments of the Constitution; such as . . . the right to keep and to bear arms.'
Thanks, David.
"The evidence is clear that the privileges or immunities of citizens included those rights in the Bill of Rights. As Michigan's Sen. Jacob Howard explained to the Senate, these privileges or immunities included, among others, 'the personal rights guarantied and secured by the first eight amendments of the Constitution; such as . . . the right to keep and to bear arms.'
In contrast, no one thought the language of the Due Process Clause included a right to arms. On this point there is consensus among constitutional scholars whether left, right or libertarian.Nevertheless, in the 1873 Slaughter-House Cases, the Reconstruction-era Supreme Court essentially eliminated the Privileges or Immunities Clause from the Constitution by holding it only protected purely national rights, like the right to be protected while on the high seas.Since then, other than a case involving a right to interstate travel,the Court has never used the Privileges or Immunities Clause."
John Phillips comments here.Thanks, David.
Comments