In June of 2008, firearms enthusiasts and law-abiding gun owners across the nation celebrated a major victory in the historic debate over the country’s Second Amendment when the Supreme Court ruled in the landmark case of District of Columbia v. Heller. But the celebration may have been premature.

The ruling of the high court in the Heller case made it clear that the federal government cannot infringe upon the individual right given by the Second Amendment to keep and bear arms for self defense and other traditional lawful purposes.

This historic case was the first time the Supreme Court addressed the issue of whether the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right or a collective right that applies only to state-regulated militias.

While many celebrated the decision, the Heller case only clarified the “federal government” cannot infringe upon a person’s Second Amendment rights, as the Heller case specifically targeted the District of Columbia (which is a “federal district” and distinct from the states).

While the Heller case may have clarified the Second Amendment and its role in federal government situations, it did not address the issue of whether this important amendment applied to state and local governments as well.

The majority of Second Amendment restrictions in the United States are the result of laws and ordinances passed by state and local governments. For example, Chicago and Oak Park, Ill., both currently have handgun bans that are very similar to the one struck down in the District of Columbia.

All of this may soon change, as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit recently ruled in the case of Nordyke v. Alamenda. The court’s decision stated that the Second Amendment does indeed apply to the states and local governments through the due process clause of the 14th Amendment. Its ruling further supported the Heller case and demonstrated the historic rights of individuals to keep and bear arms.

The 14th Amendment to the constitution clarifies that no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law.

While the recent ruling is good news for gun owners and firearms enthusiasts, the decision will only be applied against state and local governments within the geographical bounds of the Ninth Circuit Court which includes Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington.

To make this ruling effective nationwide, the remaining federal courts would have to make similar rulings in their jurisdictions or the Supreme Court would have to hear the case and provide a similar ruling themselves.

“The historic Heller decision was a major victory for law-abiding gun owners and recognized that the federal government and the District of Columbia cannot infringe on our Right to Keep and Bear Arms,” said NRA-ILA Executive Director Chris Cox. “This week’s decision, which applies to the states in the Ninth Circuit, ensures that the fundamental freedoms affirmed in Heller are not just limited to the residents of Washington, D.C.”

Outdoors correspondent Jeff Leonard can be reached at outdoors@npgco.com