Whether the Second Amendment's command that 'the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed' permits government to prohibit any of the people from exercising this right

QUESTIONS PRESENTED In District of Columbia v. Heller, this Court acknowledged that the Second | Amendment protects a pre-existing fundamental right to armed self-defense which is exercised individually and belongs to every American. Id. 128 §.Ct. U.S. 2783, 2791 & 2799 (2008). This Court also mentioned government could administer regulations | which exclude any individual, they presume as unsatisfactory, from exercising this fundamental right. Id. @ 2817 & n 26. The Second Amendment however explicitly commands that the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. Would the Supremacy Clause apply to the Second Amendment? If it does, then wouldn’t the Second Amendment’s command be supreme law; and any law which infringes upon this essential right be repugnant to the Constitution and void where, by implication, that prohibition contravenes the exercise of this irrefutable right? The following may be important questions of constitutional law which have not been, but should be, settled by this Court: 1) Does the operative clause’s command that the right of the People to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed, permit government to infringe, invade, overstep, or prohibit the right to any of the People, under any reason or pretense whatsoever, from keeping and bearing firearms for self-defense? 2) Whether, under Article VI, Clause 2, of the United States Constitution, the Second Amendment to the Constitution is supreme law; and whether any law infringing upon the right of any of the People who are free and law-abiding to keep and bear firearms for their self-defense is repugnant to the Constitution, and void? iti .