>>>United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 was an 1875 case where the U.S. Supreme Court stated that the 2nd Amendment "has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government".<<<
It said more than that. The exact statement was: "The right there specified is that of 'bearing arms for a lawful purpose.' This is not a right granted by the Constitution. Neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The second amendment declares that it shall not be infringed; but this, as has been seen, means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress."
Note the court stated the RKBA was not granted by the Constitution, nor dependent on it for its existence. In other words, the RKBA was a retained right.
The lower court interpretation was similar: "With regard to those acknowledged rights and privileges of the citizen, which form a part of his political inheritance derived from the mother country, and which were challenged and vindicated by centuries of stubborn resistance to arbitrary power, they belong to him as his birthright, and it is the duty of the particular state of which he is a citizen to protect and enforce them, and to do naught to deprive him of their full enjoyment. When any of these rights and privileges are secured in the constitution of the United States only by a declaration that the state or the United States shall not violate or abridge them, it is at once understood that they are not created or conferred by the constitution, but that the constitution only guaranties that they shall not be impaired by the state, or the United States, as the case may be."
A reference was made to Dred Scott which had listed the rights of citizenship which African-americans would be entitled should they be considered citizens, including the right "to keep and carry arms wherever they went".
Protected solely against federal infringement by the 2nd Amendment. State and local protections are the province of state and local laws.
Yes it is. Note also, "With regard to those acknowledged rights and privileges of the citizen, ... it is the duty of the particular state of which he is a citizen to protect and enforce them ..."
It is up to the particular state to protect the citizen's RKBA, not the federal government. The particular state decides which rights, and to what extent those rights, will be protected.
"A reference was made to Dred Scott which had listed the rights of citizenship which African-americans would be entitled should they be considered citizens, including the right "to keep and carry arms wherever they went"."
Yes, subject to the laws of each state. As with the freedom of speech.
"It would give to persons of the negro race, …the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, …the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went."