State v. Mitchell L. Christen, 958 N.W.2d 746

Late-night apartment dispute: Christen (after drinking) displayed a handgun, recorded a video threatening roommates/guests, cocked a shotgun, called 911 claiming a gun was stolen, and was observed by police as intoxicated.
Charges: pointing a firearm (§ 941.20(1)(c)), operating/going armed while intoxicated (§ 941.20(1)(b)), and disorderly conduct; jury acquitted on pointing, convicted on going armed while intoxicated and disorderly conduct.
Jury expressly found Christen did not act in self-defense; self-defense instruction was given and rejected.
Christen appealed, raising an as-applied Second Amendment challenge to § 941.20(1)(b) (carrying/going armed while under the influence).
Supreme Court assumed (without deciding) the statute implicated conduct within the Second Amendment but applied a two-step framework and intermediate scrutiny because the statute did not strike the Amendment’s core on these facts.
Holding: § 941.20(1)(b) is substantially related to public safety (risk from firearms plus intoxication) and survives intermediate scrutiny as applied to Christen; conviction affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Wis. Stat. § 941.20(1)(b) is unconstitutional as applied because it burdens Christen's Second Amendment right to armed self-defense	Christen: his carrying a firearm in his home—allegedly for self-defense—even while intoxicated, falls within Heller’s core right and warrants strict (or categorical) protection; statute voids right when intoxicated	State: statute does not ban ownership, only carrying/using while intoxicated; it preserves a self-defense exception; it furthers important public-safety interests, so intermediate scrutiny applies and is met	Majority: as-applied challenge fails. Because the jury found no self-defense and the burden on the core right was slight, intermediate scrutiny applies; § 941.20(1)(b) is substantially related to public safety and survives as applied to Christen.

District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008) (recognizing an individual right to possess and carry arms for self-defense, especially in the home)
McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010) (held Second Amendment incorporated against the states)
State v. Roundtree, 395 Wis. 2d 94 (Wis. 2021) (adopted two-step approach and guidance on level-of-scrutiny inquiry for Second Amendment challenges)
Ezell v. City of Chicago, 651 F.3d 684 (7th Cir. 2011) (articulated sliding-scale scrutiny tied to proximity to the Second Amendment core)
Kanter v. Barr, 919 F.3d 437 (7th Cir. 2019) (textual/historical inquiry for whether regulated activity falls within the Second Amendment)
United States v. Chester, 628 F.3d 673 (4th Cir. 2010) (identifying the Second Amendment core as possession and carrying for self-defense)
State v. Head, 255 Wis. 2d 194 (Wis. 2002) (State bears burden to disprove self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt)