It wasn't as interesting as I'd hoped, but if you haven't listened to enough talking heads, cam&country on NRA news had several people in a round table discussion listening to and commenting on the oral discussion:
nra news
They didn't finish the oral discussion by any means, and it's to be continued tonight. The replay at the link above will be available until the next show starts at 9:00 EST.
The disturbing thing is that while we definitely won't KNOW until June, the consensus was that the 2nd will almost certainly be considered an individual right but may not overturn the DC handgun ban.
Although I would still think of that as a minor victory and far from the worst outcome ... we would now have clear stare decisis (sp?) that at a Federal level, at least, a ban on any type of gun, no matter how broad, is acceptable. This is a scary thing, as where does that end? When we are all in the boat that gun banners have been pushing for, where the only legal firearm is a .22 short single shot rifle? And ownership of only one per household? With a limit on ammunition ownership of 10 rounds or less?
The group was actually very optimistic for a complete victory, but it worried me that a court could truly fall into that trap. I hope they are smarter than that.
For those of you who didn't listen ... the argument was consistently (because this was based solely on guns in the home) that a handgun was small and concealable and could be carried into schools, churches, the subway, etc. and therefore cities should be able to ban them. But if we do have a right to bear arms outside the home (as we do in most states, 40 of which allow CCW) then that is exactly what makes the handgun most important to still have ownership of.
If a handgun ban is allowed to stand, is this something we can expand upon in future cases or is it established Federal law? Perhaps it was a mistake to allow this to be so completely and narrowly defined to guns in the house, as even winning this battle forfeits future battles.
I don't know. I'm just very hopeful that the ruling against the ban will stand and what we'll be defining in later cases is not whether a full ban is constitutional, but what types of constraints on the guns we buy (background checks, where guns can be carried, etc.) are.