Law Commons^™

The Misapplication Of The Lautenberg Amendment In Voisine V. United States And The Resulting Loss Of Second Amendment Protection, Cynthia M. Menta

Akron Law Review

Over the past two decades, Congress has enacted various laws aimed at protecting victims of domestic violence. One such law is 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(9), also known as the Lautenberg Amendment, which prohibits any person convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence from possessing a firearm. However, because the Second Amendment has been deemed a fundamental right by the Supreme Court, such a restriction on firearms possession is only permissible if it serves a compelling government interest. Unfortunately, since the Lautenberg Amendment was enacted in 1996, the courts have struggled to interpret its ambiguous terms, which has made it …

Clearing The Smoke From The Right To Bear Arms And The Second Amendment, Anthony J. Dennis

Akron Law Review

Despite raging battles in Congress, in the press and in state legislatures over gun control, the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution, the very source of every U.S. citizen's right to possess firearms, is one of the most ignored and overlooked parts of the American Bill of Rights. Much of what has been said about the Second Amendment is hostile to the very rights so plainly guaranteed in that provision. Law school constitutional law classes frequently study the First Amendment, "close their eyes" to the Second and move immediately on to study the Fourth Amendment. Some have speculated that …

"Your Weapons, You Will Not Need Them." Comment On The Supreme Court's Sixty-Year Silence On The Right To Keep And Bear Arms, Anthony Gallia

Akron Law Review

Interpretation of the Second Amendment can be divided into two different schools of thought; individual rights theorists, and collective rights theorists. Individual rights theorists argue that the Second Amendment creates a right in every person to keep and bear arms. Collective rights theorists advance the position that the Second Amendment creates a collective right in the people as a whole. The purpose of this comment is to emphasize the controversy surrounding the Second Amendment and the need for guidance on the issue by the United States Supreme Court. Part II of this article discusses the text of the Second Amendment …

A Preliminary Consideration Of Issues Raised In The Firearms Sellers Immunity Bill, Frank J. Vandall

Akron Law Review

Snipings, mass-murders by disgruntled employees, children shooting children, and a vast number of spousal murders are everyday news across the country. In the numerous lawsuits brought by individual victims and over 30 cities, it has been alleged that gun manufacturers and sellers have an important role to play in designing guns to be safer and in closely monitoring gun sales. The courts are weighing these issues and have dismissed a large number of individual and city suits for various reasons. As the Senate debates the Bill (S. 659) that shields those in the gun trade from liability, several issues need …

Questioning The Necessity Of Concealed Carry Laws, William J. Michael

Akron Law Review

The State of Ohio recently became the thirty-seventh state to pass some form of concealed carry legislation, under which persons may carry concealed firearms. Given the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, such legislation appears unnecessary since individuals have a constitutional right to carry firearms.

In this article, I argue that the Second Amendment’s text guarantees an individual’s right (not a state’s right or a “collective” right) to keep and bear firearms. Part I of this article contains that argument. If the text is binding—and I believe it is—further analysis regarding whether the Second Amendment guarantees an individual’s right …

Gonzales V. Raich: How To Fix A Mess Of "Economic" Proportions, Gregory W. Watts

Akron Law Review

The Note examines the history, evolution, elements, and application of the Commerce Clause doctrine. Part II, Sections A through C, concentrate on the history of the Supreme Court’s interpretation of the Commerce Clause, focusing extensively on Wickard v. Filburn, which the majority in Raich held controlling, and United States v. Lopez and United States v. Morrison, which the dissent would have held as controlling. Part II, Sections D and E, provide an overview of the Controlled Substances Act, whose constitutionality was challenged as applied in Gonzales v. Raich, and the Compassionate Use Act of California, which led to the conflict …

Statutory Misinterpretations: Small V. United States Darkens The Already Murky Waters Of Statutory Interpretation, Michelle Schuld

Akron Law Review

Part II of this Note will examine the background of this issue by exploring the history and purpose of the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the circuit split arising over the interpretation of the words “any court” under § 922(g)(1). Part III will focus on Small v. United States in detail, including the underlying facts, procedural history, and majority and dissenting opinions. Part IV will analyze this decision and argue that the majority misused canons of statutory interpretation to reach an interpretation that is contrary to the plain meaning of the statute. The section will also discuss the majority’s …