The State Supreme Court has heard oral arguments in the challenge to the constitutionality of the state’s conceal and carry gun law. Attorney Bert Miller, representing the plaintiffs in the case – those opposed to the law – argues a clause of the State Constitution prohibits the carrying of concealed weapons. Assistant Attorney General Paul Wilson, arguing for the state, says the plaintiffs’ argument has no basis in law. He argues the Legislature has the right to pass a conceal and carry law. Despite the discussion of the constitutionality, per se, the judges seemed to take more interest in the plaintiffs’ suggestion that the law would cause problems with the Hancock Amendment, which bans the state from forcing local jurisdictions to comply with unfunded mandates. The plaintiffs say there would be a high cost to counties, while the law’s supporters say the fees to obtain licenses would take care of that. There’s no idea when the Court will rule.