McDonald v. City of Chicago
Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.
Status
More on how this was screened
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen displaced lower-court means-end scrutiny frameworks while reaffirming McDonald and protecting public carry; earlier lower-court refusals to extend handgun protection beyond the home cannot confine McDonald today. State courts choosing separate rules under their own constitutions did not reject McDonald's federal holding.
2,022 later cases cite McDonald v. City of Chicago; 540 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.
Relying on McDonald v. City of Chicago?
This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.
No reviewed court has overruled or limited this case.
Every one of the 540 flagged citations was read, and each turned out to be something other than adverse treatment: a routine application, a party's argument the court rejected, or the case itself discussing older law. That reading is the finding this page exists to report.
Does this case still carry your argument?
Describe your facts. Ezel reads McDonald v. City of Chicago and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace