Debate whether Scalia, on the one hand, or Stevens and/or Breyer in dissent made

Debate whether Scalia, on the one hand, or Stevens and/or Breyer in dissent made the stronger argument about the purpose of the amendment and the constitutionality of the District of Columbia regulation.
* Address relevant precedents *Don’t just summarize the decision. Rather, use details of the D.c v Heller decision, and especially the range of views expressed by the justices in the opinion of the court and the concurring and dissenting opinions, as the basis of the discussion
Required Text: Epstein, McGuire and Walker, Constitutional Law for a Changing America: Rights, Liberties and Justice. Eleventh Edition. 2022. Sage/CQ Press. ISBN: 978-1-5443-9125-0

This week’s discussion board focuses on District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the first case to examine the Second Amendment in detail and how the amendment relates to the public policy debate concerning gun rights and gun control. Justice Scalia’s opinion of the court and Justice Stevens’ dissent in this 5-4 decision each examines the Second Amendment and come to very different conclusions about the amendment’s history and how its relatively brief language should be interpreted.
debate whether Scalia, on the one hand, or Stevens and/or Breyer in dissent made the stronger argument about the purpose of the amendment and the constitutionality of the District of Columbia regulation. Don’t just summarize the case. Instead, your comments should be your evaluation of the arguments presented in the opinions. Also, your comments should not simply be your own personal views on gun rights and gun control. Instead, focus on the case itself and relate your comments to the assigned reading in the Epstein and Walker text book. The book provides background to the debate over the meaning of the Second Amendment and particularly the distinction between the collective and individual rights interpretation of the amendment.
Your comments should also include details from the oral argument before the Supreme Court in the Heller case. Pay attention first to Walter Dellinger’s argument that opens the session on behalf of the District of Columbia in support of the challenged gun regulation. Later, Alan Gura argues on behalf of Heller who challenged the constitutionality of the regulation. At one point Justice Breyer asks whether the District of Columbia had a reasonable public policy concern when the legislation was first introduced in 1976. Their exchange of views should be helpful in framing the debate about gun rights raised by the case. Justice Breyer’s dissenting opinion in the Heller case also raises a number of points in rebuttal to Scalia’s opinion of the court.