A high-profile case currently under review by the U.S. Supreme Court could have an effect on DeKalb law.

In the current case of District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court is considering whether a gun ban in Washington, D.C. is an infringement on the Second Amendment to the Constitution. The interpretation of the Second Amendment has long been a source of intense political, sociological and cultural debate.

The suit was filed by Dick Anthony Heller, a security guard in Washington, D.C., against the Firearms Control Regulations Act of 1975, which heavily restricts gun ownership in the District of Columbia.

The case was originally dismissed by the District Court, but the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled provisions of the Act violate the Second Amendment. The city has appealed the decision to the Supreme Court, which began hearing arguments in the case March 18.

If the Supreme Court sides with Heller and the “individual right” view of the Second Amendment, cities like DeKalb could face similar legal challenges to their own similar laws.

The Municipal Code also forbids discharging guns within city limits and sales of weapons to minors. The penalty for violation of Section 10 is a $50 to $500 fine. The code has no prohibition on possession of guns within the home, an area specifically targeted by the D.C. gun ban.

DeKalb City Attorney Norma Guess said she was not familiar with the D.C. v. Heller case.

“It’s really not on our radar screen,” Guess said. “It’s not an issue that has come up at all.”

DeKalb Mayor Frank Van Buer said if the D.C. ban is ruled unconstitutional, the city would probably not change its law on its own.

“I would hope the Court allows Washington [D.C.] to maintain its law,” Van Buer said. “That’s my personal feeling on the matter.”

In the event the D.C. gun ban is struck down, Van Buer said the city would probably have to hold a hearing to determine what is best for the community, adding that, if it were a constitutional issue, it would be out of the city’s hands.

“Let’s hope this thing plays out the right way,” Van Buer said.

Marc Falkoff, assistant professor of law at NIU, said the Court is likely to rule that the Second Amendment refers to an individual, rather than collective, right.

“It depends on how the Supreme Court would rule in Heller’s favor,” Falkoff said. “I find it very, very unlikely that the Supreme Court would rule in perhaps the way that an [National Rifle Association] stalwart would want them to rule, to hold that there can be no restrictions on gun ownership or possession.”

“It’s much more likely that the court will find that gun ownership is a personal Second Amendment right, something that would be a truly radical shift, but it’s also likely that they’re going to rule that the state can impose … that the federal government can impose … reasonable restrictions on gun ownership.”

Falkoff said if the Court sides with D.C., it would likely reinforce radical state gun control measures.

“I would imagine there would be relatively few places in the United States where politicians would find it advisable to engage in that kind of restriction,” Falkoff added. “It can certainly be challenged, but assuming the court sides with Heller … it’s certainly plausible that someone might go ahead challenging a concealed weapons law.”

“I would be stunned if any court deemed a concealed weapon law to be unreasonable,” Falkoff said.

Falkoff said a ruling is expected sometime in June.