WASHINGTON --More than half of Minnesota's congressional delegation has weighed in on a U.S. Supreme Court case that could once and for all define the Second Amendment as guaranteeing a personal right to own firearms.
A friend-of-the-court brief filed Friday urged the justices to rule against a hotly debated District of Columbia gun ban, widely considered the strictest in the country.
In an indication of the intense political crossfire over guns, the brief was signed by a bipartisan majority of 55 senators and 250 House members, including Sen. Norm Coleman and five of Minnesota's eight House members.
"This is the most significant Second Amendment case to face the Supreme Court in decades," Coleman said. "Gun ownership is a fundamental right, whether you live in Washington, D.C., or Wadena."
The outcome of the case could settle years of debate as to whether the U.S. Constitution guarantees an individual's right to possess firearms -- the view of gun-rights groups -- or a collective right related to military service -- a view espoused by many gun-control advocates.
Central to the case is the long-disputed interpretation of the Second Amendment, which reads: "A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Critics of D.C.'s 1976 gun law say it violates the amendment by virtually banning the private possession of handguns. It permits only registered rifles and shotguns, requiring that they be kept in homes "unloaded, disassembled, or bound by a trigger lock or similar device."
The congressional brief urges the justices to find that "the District's prohibitions on mere possession by law-abiding persons of handguns in the home and having usable firearms there are unreasonable."