Now let’s hear what Hillary Clinton, Barrack Obama, and John Edwards have to say. What do they believe the framers meant by the “people”? The answers will speak volumes about their views on a wide range of issues.

Over the past few years, a heated national debate has raged over what the Constitution says about presidential power, war, the environment, education, health care, the reach of federal power, affirmative action, abortion, and immigration.

The American people have the right to know how a presidential candidate would interpret the Constitution’s most basic tenet — the rights of individuals over government.

The former president of the National Riffle Association, Sandy Froman, recently explained the importance of the case and how it could impact Americans nationwide. The first Jewish-American to hold that office in the 136-year history of the NRA, and a respected colleague, Ms. Froman has a very personal reason for her unwavering advocacy of individual gun rights. Nearly 25 years ago, she was the victim of a home invasion. In a recent column, Ms. Froman explained, “I learned first hand that the right of self-defense means nothing unless you also have the means of self-defense.”

Anti-Second Amendment advocates also understand the importance of the case. They hope the court guts the gun rights allowed in the Bill of Rights.

“We’re nervous,” president of the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, Paul Helmke, told the Washington Post. “Anytime you go to the Supreme Court, you could end up with all sorts of gun laws being called into question.”

Presidential candidates whose views on the Second Amendment have been questioned should step up and detail their position on this issue. Mrs. Clinton, and Messrs. Obama and Edwards should explain their views. Mr. Giuliani should explain more fully why he opposes the D.C. gun ban but supports other restrictions on Second Amendment rights.

The American people expect leadership. Part of being a leader is answering the tough questions openly and forthrightly. On this issue, the court will do the heavy lifting. The candidates’ views, however, will certainly leave a mark.