Final answer:
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to bear arms, particularly for self-defense within the home, through decisions like District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. Chicago, while also indicating that gun rights are not absolute.
Step-by-step explanation:
In its most recent 2nd Amendment decisions, the Supreme Court has had a significant impact on the interpretation and application of gun rights in the United States. Notably, in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home, making it clear that some gun control laws could violate the Second Amendment. However, this decision applied only to federal and territorial governments since the District of Columbia is not a state. This changed with McDonald v. Chicago (2010), where the Supreme Court incorporated the Second Amendment through the Fourteenth Amendment, making it applicable to the states and thus to their respective gun control laws. Despite these rulings, the Supreme Court's actions suggest that gun rights are not absolute, as demonstrated in 2015 when it allowed several of San Francisco's strict gun control laws to remain in place.