The 9th incorporated the 2A against the states, and then pointed out that this squarely overturned Hickman which was a decision that said individuals did not have standing to challenge Kali's may-issue concealed weapons law.
So, in short order we can expect to see a case challenging may-issue. And, since the challenge will be against the backdrop of an individual-rights 2A, there will be heightened scrutiny of whether its preserves everyone's rights.
Shall-issue may come to Kali in my lifetime.
Not so fast my friend! That’s well and good for the left coast, us right coasters aren’t in a heap of good “standing” yet.
Lest we not forget that Chicago has a pending 14th + 2nd A case as well.
Though, Chicago’s not the most pressing incorporation case, the NY nunchaku case is ( http://www.nunchakulaw.com/). Earlier this year the Second Circuit ruled that the 2A is NOT incorporated, the Supreme Court filing deadline for appeal was promptly extended by Ginsburg to allow both sides to research Nordyke and argue appropriately. Nordyke found it to be incorporated, Maloney did not, so I expect the SC to take Maloney and see where it goes. If the SCOTUS grants Cert they would hear it sometime between Oct-May and issue a ruling by June 2010.
Maloney’s facts are simple: Does the 2A apply to the states, and are nunchaku protected arms?
An area I’d be interested in Nordyke appealing would be the distinction in Heller about allowing the barring of arms in “sensitive places such as schools and government buildings” while Nordyke says the fairgrounds are sensitive enough to allow the banning of arms just because the County says they’ve had shooting problems before.