At the NYT, Adam Liptak has the scoop that lower courts are uniformly finding that the Supreme Court's landmark Second Amendment decision, District of Columbia v. Heller, does not overturn the laws that it expressly said it did not overturn. From the opinion:

... nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.<sup>26

26</sup> We identify these presumptively lawful regulatory measures only as examples; our list does not purport to be exhaustive.

From today's NYT story:

So far, Heller is firing blanks.

The courts have upheld federal laws banning gun ownership by people convicted of felonies and some misdemeanors, by illegal immigrants and by drug addicts. They have upheld laws banning machine guns and sawed-off shotguns. They have upheld laws making it illegal to carry guns near schools or in post offices. And they have upheld laws concerning concealed and unregistered weapons.

Anyone surprised by this development is cordially invited to my next poker game.

The Heller decision is not "firing blanks." It is merely not hitting targets it was not aimed at. When another highly restrictive gun control law like D.C.'s comes up for review, one that prevents law-abiding citizens from possessing guns for basic self-defense, then it will be time to assess its impact.

Doug Berman has a different view at SL&P.