The D.C. Circuit will not be re-hearing the Parker case en banc. The government of the District of Columbia has to decide whether to seek Supreme Court review of the decision, which invalidated the city’s strict laws against guns. Robert Levy, the lawyer for the so-far victorious would-be gun owners of the District, tells NR that he would not oppose the city’s petition: “Our goal from the beginning has been to get a foursquare pronouncement from the Supreme Court on the real meaning of the Second Amendment.”

The case has split gun-rights activists in the past, with some of them fearing that asking the Court to pronounce on the matter could set back their cause if it leads to a disappointing answer. But Levy says he is finding less resistance now. Optimism about how the Court would resolve the issue has increased thanks to the replacement of Justice O’Connor by Justice Alito. Nodding to the political circumstances of the moment, he adds that “the Court is probably better than it’s going to be. So for folks who do want review the timing may be just right.”

Even if the Court takes the case, Levy warns, it could duck the Second-Amendment issue in various ways, such as by finding that Levy’s clients didn’t have standing to sue. If the Court took the case and affirmed the individual-rights view of the Second Amendment, meanwhile, it would set up further litigation on two questions: What regulations run afoul of those rights, and can the federal courts apply those rights against state governments?

Levy stresses that “affirming an individual-rights perspective is not equivalent to a right for everyone to challenge registration requirements” or other regulations, and thinks that this point might help liberal justices rule in his clients’ favor. “I wouldn’t write off Ruth Bader Ginsburg or any of the other ones.”