District of Columbia v. Heller 2008, is a landmark case in which the Supreme Court of the United States held that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, unconnected with service in a militia, for traditionally lawful purposes.

McDonald VS City of Chicago -  Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporates the state's inability to ban handguns due to the Second Amendment right recognized in Heller . 

Peruta vs County of SanDiego - After an initial ruling (2-1) in 2014 that held that the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution protected the right to carry a concealed weapon, the court reheard the case en banc, ultimately reversing the lower court ruling, saying that "there is no Second Amendment right for members of the general public to carry concealed firearms in public.

Dr. Ossian Sweet Trials - Racism, gun laws, and the Pistol Purchase License. A Detroit series of trials.

Jackson vs City of SanFrancisco (pdf)

State of Michigan vs Siwatu-Salama RA Pointing a firearm is not deadly force. Michigan Court of Appeals 2019

United States vs Chester - The sole issue presented in this appeal is whether William Samuel Chester's conviction for illegal possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9) abridges his right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment in light of District of Columbia v. Heller.

People vs Malik 1976 - A bludgeon as a dangerous weapon.

United States vs Marzzarella - whether Defendant Michael Marzzarella's conviction under 18 U.S.C. § 922(k) for possession of a handgun with an obliterated serial number violates his Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

United States vs Chovan - ​Daniel Chovan appeals the district court's denial of his motion to dismiss an indictment against him for violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9). Section 922(g)(9) prohibits persons convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors from possessing firearms for life. Chovan contends that § 922(g)(9) is unconstitutional both on its face and as applied to him because it violates his Second Amendment right to bear arms. In the alternative, he argues that § 922(g)(9) does not apply to him because his civil rights have been restored within the meaning of 18 U.S.C.

Wren vs District of Columbia - (pink pistols) D.C. must grant handgun carry licenses to D.C. residents on the same basis that carry permits are issued in most states. In particular, D.C. may not limit carry permits only to persons who prove a “special need for self-protection distinguishable from the general community as supported by evidence of specific threats or previous attacks that demonstrate a special danger to the applicant’s life.” Instead, D.C. must follow the standard American system: issuing permits to adults who pass a fingerprint-based background check and a safety training class.

Moore vs Madigan -  a pair of cases decided in 2013 by the U.S. Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit, regarding the constitutionality of the State of Illinois' no-issue legislation and policy regarding the carry of concealed weapons. 

Terry VS Ohio - (Terry Stop) Under the Fourth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, a police officer may stop a suspect on the street and frisk him or her without probable cause to arrest, if the police officer has a reasonable suspicion that the person has committed, is committing, or is about to commit a crime and has a reasonable belief that the person "may be armed and presently dangerous."

Wickard vs Filburn - a United States Supreme Court decision that dramatically increased the regulatory power of the federal government.

Drake vs Filko - New Jersey shall issue and justifiable need.

Woollard vs Gallagher - the first direct challenge to a "may-issue" concealed carry firearms law in the United States.

Kachalsky vs City of Westchester - three plaintiffs seek to carry handguns outside the home for self-defense. Each applied for and was denied a full-carry concealed-handgun license by one of the defendant licensing officers (the “State Defendants” ) for failing to establish “proper cause”—a special need for self-protection—pursuant to New York Penal Law section 400.00(2)(f). Plaintiffs, along with the Second Amendment Foundation, thereafter filed this action to contest New York's proper cause requirement. They contend that the proper cause provision, on its face or as applied to them, violates the Second Amendment as interpreted by the Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller

Muscarello vs United States - Does the fact that guns were found in a locked glove compartment, or the trunk, of a car, preclude the application of 18 U section 924(c)(1), which imposes a 5-year mandatory prison term upon a person who "uses or carries a firearm" "during and in relation to" a "drug trafficking crime"?

Ezell vs City of Chicago - Chicago ordinance prohibiting possession of handguns. The city then established a regime that required one hour of range training as a prerequisite to obtaining a permit to possess a handgun, but banned shooting ranges throughout the city. 

 Bridgeville Rifle and Pistol Club LLC vs Small - whether unelected officials from the Delaware parks and forest departments (whose power was expressly limited) could ban (except for a narrow exception for hunting) the possession of guns in state parks and forests in contravention of Delawareans’ rights under the State’s constitution.

Alden vs Maine -  States are immune from private suits in federal court and that Congress lacks the authority to abrogate that immunity.

Bliss vs Commonwealth -  an indictment founded on the act of the legislature of this state, "to prevent persons in this commonwealth from wearing concealed arms."

People vs Yanna -  banning possession of tasers and stun guns by private citizens in public.

Texas vs Johnson (1989) -  Flag burning constitutes symbolic speech that is protected by the First Amendment

Capital Area District Library vs Michigan Open Carry, Inc -  whether district libraries are subject to the same restrictions regarding firearm regulation that apply to other local public libraries established by local units of government.

Simpson vs State of Tennessee - Based on a confidential informant's tip, police stopped the defendant's vehicle.   A consensual search of her person revealed drugs.   The issue in this appeal is whether the tip, as corroborated by independent police work, exhibited sufficient indicia of reliability to satisfy the two-pronged 1 constitutional test of reliability and provide reasonable suspicion to justify the investigatory stop.

Warren vs District of Columbia -  the police do not owe a specific duty to provide police services to citizens based on the public duty doctrine. (civil liability)

Michigan Gun Owners vs Ann Arbor Public Schools and Michigan Open Carry Inc. vs Clio - ​an action in the Washtenaw Circuit Court against the Ann Arbor Public Schools (AAPS), challenging three AAPS policies that banned the possession of firearms in schools and at school-sponsored events(pdf)

People vs LLewellyn - Michigan preemption case. Essentially, the principle of pre-emption is that when general law on a specific subject occupies a particular field so completely that any local ordinances seeking to regulate conduct in that field will necessarily conflict because of inconsistency between the two, the ordinance must give way to the general law.

Caetano vs Massachusetts - a case in which the Supreme Court of the United States unanimously vacated a Massachusetts conviction of a woman who carried a stun gun for self-defense.

United States Elbert Nichols entered a conditional guilty plea to one count of being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 922(g)(1) and 924, reserving his right to appeal the district court’s denial of his suppression motion. On appeal, he raises three arguments: (1) that the police officer’s decision to run a warrant check on him was based on his race, violating the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment; (2) that the search of his vehicle incident to his arrest violated the Fourth Amendment; and (3) that the questioning by the police after his arrest violated his Fifth Amendment rights under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966)

Kolbe vs Hogan - challenging the constitutionality of Maryland's Firearm Safety Act

Heien vs North Carolina -  a decision by the United States Supreme Court, ruling that a police officer's reasonable mistake of law can provide the individualized suspicion required by the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution to justify a traffic stop.

Worman vs Healey - assault weapons ban - a constitutional challenge to a Massachusetts law proscribing the sale, transfer, and possession of certain semiautomatic assault weapons and large-capacity magazines 

MCRGO vs Ferndale  -  whether local units of government are precluded from enacting and enforcing ordinances that make local public buildings gun-free zones.

Cohen vs California - Did California's statute, prohibiting the display of offensive messages such as "Fuck the Draft," violate freedom of expression as protected by the First Amendment?

People vs Battles #1 - Defendant charged with possession of a billy must knowingly possess it with knowledge of its real character as a weapon.