Final answer:
The District of Columbia v. Heller case is cited to illustrate the Supreme Court's stance on the individual right to bear arms as protected by the Second Amendment, influencing further legal perspectives and gun control regulations.
Step-by-step explanation:
The author cites the case District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) to demonstrate the Supreme Court's interpretation of the Second Amendment as protecting an individual's right to keep and bear arms for traditional lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. This landmark decision concluded that certain gun control legislations could be infringing upon this right. Meanwhile, the later case of McDonald v. Chicago (2010) expanded this individual rights view of the Second Amendment to the states, based on the incorporation doctrine of the Fourteenth Amendment.
The District of Columbia v. Heller case notably departed from the collective rights view, which posits that the Second Amendment's right to keep and bear arms is connected to militia service. Instead, it affirmed the individual rights perspective, suggesting that the right is personal and not tied to militia service. This decision has had significant implications for subsequent court cases and legislation on gun control laws at both the federal and state levels.