Judicial Branches

http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/09pdf/08-1521.pdf 

    The Supreme Court case of McDonald vs. Chicago, was a federal case taken about in October 2009, about how McDonald was fighting against the city of Chicago, and it's gun laws. McDonald. was questioning, if the Second Amendment, gave the right to bear arms, why is the city of Chicago, stopping him from carrying his handgun. The trial was very extensive and left a shock onto the world. The shock was that the Supreme Court ruled in favor of McDonald. The constitutional connection is that how was his case taken all the way to the Supreme Court?
     Article 3 Section 2 of the United States Constitution states "The Trial of all Crimes, except in Cases of Impeachment, shall be by Jury; and such Trial shall be held in the State where the said Crimes shall have been committed; but when not committed within any State, the Trial shall be at such Place or Places as the Congress may by Law have directed." This is meaning that Congress must approve of this case having some Constitutional disagreement, and then sending this case to the Supreme Court, where they would have to rule upon the case. What about it that makes it unconstitutional is that if the conflict breaks any of the amendments or the articles of the United States Constitution. Amendment 2 of the Constitution is that as citizens of the U.S. we have the right to bear arms. McDonald felt as though that he was able to carry his weaponry in cases of emergency and for personal protection. Unfortunately, Chicago has very strict gun laws, and McDonald was not going down without a fight. In the end though, he won.
    In my opinion McDonald is right and has nothing but every right to expound upon what the Constitution gives him a United States citizen. McDonald is the type of American that pushed on to reach richetness. The judicial branch was only able to judge on what the Constitution said. I myself would also do something like this. This case also was similiar to another case that was won named, District of Columbia v. Heller. It to me seems as though people today are fighting for their rights, and with a successful and effiecient legal sytem they have the right to do so.