The following is meant to note a structural similarity that may predict how the Supreme Court will act in the future. It has no bearing on what the Court ought to do.
In perusing the decision District of Columbia v. Heller, a thought occurred to me. Like Roe v. Wade, the decision acknowledges that the right it protects is not absolute.
In Heller, Justice Scalia wrote:
Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose
In
Roe, Justice Blackmun wrote:
We, therefore, conclude that the right of personal privacy includes the abortion decision, but that this right is not unqualified, and must be considered against important state interests in regulation.
Opponents of abortion rights have had a difficult time passing laws regulating abortion, even when those laws are supported by a strong majority of the American public. I suspect it is reasonable to speculate that attempts to pass laws regulating gun rights may have an equally difficult time passing constitutional muster when challenged before the Supreme Court, despite it being written that there is no absolute right to individual gun ownership.