Page:Spencer v. Nigrelli.pdf/23

 discipline of church members, and other matters.” Dkt. 13-3, at 14–15 (collecting Supreme Court cases). Yet the State makes no attempt to demonstrate that the regulation is consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition in this area. See generally, Dkt. 43.

Plaintiffs are likely to prevail on the merits of their the Establishment Clause claim.


 * 3.

Lastly, as this Court determined in Hardaway, the houses of worship exclusion violates the right of individuals to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense. That right was enshrined in the Second Amendment to the Constitution, ratified in 1791: “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.” U.S. Const. amend. II.


 * a. Applicable Supreme Court Precedent

On three recent occasions, the Supreme Court explored this right and supplied the framework that resolves the issues on this motion pertaining to the right of individuals to keep and bear arms in public for self-defense. A thorough understanding of the Supreme Court’s Heller, McDonald, and Bruen opinions is essential. This Court discussed them at length in Hardaway, No. 22-CV-771, 2022 WL 16646220, at *7–14.

Most relevant here, Bruen held that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments “protect an individual’s right to carry a handgun for self-defense outside the home.”