McDonald+v.+Chicago+privileges+and+immunities+clause

from Evan, 3/1: I found this explanation of the P&I clause issue, and its importance beyond the gun case, at Reason magazine, a libertarian publication. ////"McDonald// will therefore turn on whether the right to keep and bear arms applies to Chicago via the 14th Amendment’s Privileges or Immunities Clause or via its Due Process Clause. That distinction matters because the Privileges or Immunities Clause has been a dead letter since the controversial [| //Slaughterhouse Cases//] of 1873, which gutted the clause while upholding a state-sanctioned slaughterhouse monopoly in Louisiana. And despite overwhelming [| historical evidence] that the Privileges or Immunities Clause was specifically written and ratified after the Civil War in order to secure individual rights against state abuse—including the right to armed self-defense—//Slaughterhouse// has never been overturned. So the stakes in //McDonald// are high indeed. And they aren’t just limited to gun rights."// Here's the full text of the article: //[|Getting the 14th amendment right]//