[robertpaulsen]

I haven't yet read the opinion, but I assume they said the second amendment applies to the states? I assumed this because the dissenting judge lamented that DC wasn't a state.

The the article said, "The majority opinion also rejects the argument that the Second Amendment does not apply to the District of Columbia because it is not a State."

Leaving me, therefore, to conclude that they considered DC a "state" for this ruling. (ie., the ruling applies to the states, we reject the argument that the ruling doesn't apply to DC, ergo, DC is a state).

[Dead Corpse]

haven't yet read the opinion,

That much is very obvious.

... but I assume they said the second amendment applies to the states?

No. It said it applies as a protection for an Individual Right, regardless of which State or District they live in or whether or not they are in a "militia".

[NinoFan]

Try reading the ruling before opening your mouth.

[patton]

Perhaps a more careful reading of law might be in order, before you draw legal conclusions.

At least for today, this case stands as law, in DC. Might be gone tomorrow, but today, it is law.

[ctdonath2]

I haven't yet read the opinion

Then read the opinion before spreading further confusion.