Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Institution
- Publication Year
- Publication
- Publication Type
Articles 1 - 11 of 11
Full-Text Articles in Law
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association V. Bruen, T.C. Lisle Whitman Ii
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association V. Bruen, T.C. Lisle Whitman Ii
Tennessee Law Review
No abstract provided.
Presumptively Awful: How The Federal Government Is Failing To Protect The Constitutional Rights Of Those Adjudicated As Mentally Ill, As Illustrated By The 18 U.S.C. § 922(G)(4) Circuit Split, Kaitlyn M. Rubcich
Pepperdine Law Review
The Third, Sixth, and Ninth Circuits are split as to whether the 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4) federal firearms ban violates the Second Amendment rights of those who were once adjudicated as mentally ill but have since returned to good mental health. In Beers v. Attorney General, the Third Circuit applied its own unique framework and held that § 922(g)(4) is constitutional. Meanwhile, the Sixth Circuit applied intermediate scrutiny in Tyler v. Hillsdale County Sheriff’s Department and deemed the statute unconstitutional, while in Mai v. United States, the Ninth Circuit also applied intermediate scrutiny but held that § 922(g)(4) is constitutional. …
Once Mentally Ill, Always A Danger? Lifetime Bans On Gun Ownership Under Fire Following Involuntary Commitment, Amanda Pendel
Once Mentally Ill, Always A Danger? Lifetime Bans On Gun Ownership Under Fire Following Involuntary Commitment, Amanda Pendel
Touro Law Review
18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(4) imposes a lifetime ban on those who have been involuntarily committed to a mental institution from purchasing, or possessing a firearm, regardless of an extended passage of time, or a finding that the individual is unlikely to pose a danger to themselves or the public. Three circuits have created a split concerning the constitutionality of this statute. The Third Circuit held in Beers v. Attorney General United States that those involuntarily committed were outside of the scope of the Second Amendment; therefore, the § 922(g)(4)’s categorical ban is constitutional. Next, the Ninth Circuit in Mai v. …
A Comprehensive Administrative Solution To The Armed Career Criminal Act Debacle , Avi M. Kupfer
A Comprehensive Administrative Solution To The Armed Career Criminal Act Debacle , Avi M. Kupfer
Michigan Law Review
For thirty years, the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”) has imposed a fifteen-year mandatory minimum sentence on those people convicted as felons in possession of a firearm or ammunition who have three prior convictions for a violent felony or serious drug offense. Debate about the law has existed mainly within a larger discussion on the normative value of mandatory minimums. Assuming that the ACCA endures, however, administering it will continue to be a challenge. The approach that courts use to determine whether past convictions qualify as ACCA predicate offenses creates ex ante uncertainty and the potential for intercourt disparities. Furthermore, …
Scientific Evidence In The Age Of Daubert: A Proposal For A Dual Standard Of Admissibility In Civil And Criminal Cases , William P. Haney Iii
Scientific Evidence In The Age Of Daubert: A Proposal For A Dual Standard Of Admissibility In Civil And Criminal Cases , William P. Haney Iii
Pepperdine Law Review
No abstract provided.
Collateral Review Of Career Offender Sentences: The Case For Coram Nobis, Douglas J. Bench Jr.
Collateral Review Of Career Offender Sentences: The Case For Coram Nobis, Douglas J. Bench Jr.
University of Michigan Journal of Law Reform
Occasionally, criminals correctly interpret the law while courts err. Litigation pursuant to the federal Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA) includes numerous examples. The ACCA imposes harsher sentences upon felons in possession of firearms with prior "violent felony" convictions. Over time, courts defined "violent" so contrary to its common meaning that it eventually came to encompass driving under the influence, unwanted touching, and the failure to report to correctional facilities. However, in a series of recent decisions, the Supreme Court has attempted to clarify the meaning of violent in the context of the ACCA and, in the process, excluded such offenses. …
Scrutinizing The Second Amendment, Adam Winkler
Scrutinizing The Second Amendment, Adam Winkler
Michigan Law Review
One overlooked issue in the voluminous literature on the Second Amendment is what standard of review should apply to gun control if the Amendment is read to protect an individual right to bear arms. This lack of attention may be due to the assumption that strict scrutiny would necessarily apply because the right would be "fundamental" or because the right is located in the Bill of Rights. In this Article, Professor Winkler challenges that assumption and considers the arguments for a contrary conclusion: that the Second Amendment's individual right to bear arms is appropriately governed by a deferential, reasonableness review …
The Sound Of Silence: The Supreme Court And The Second Amendment - A Response To Professor Kopel, David S. Yassky
The Sound Of Silence: The Supreme Court And The Second Amendment - A Response To Professor Kopel, David S. Yassky
Elisabeth Haub School of Law Faculty Publications
Until now, the revisionists have based their argument entirely on claims about the intentions of those who framed and ratified the Second Amendment. Revisionists have heretofore conceded that the courts have rejected their approach; indeed, the basic structure of the revisionist argument has been: The Founders intended an individual right to firearm possession; the courts (abetted by the academy) have all but nullified the Amendment by treating it as a mere safeguard for militia; the courts should recognize their error and strike down gun control laws.
With his latest contribution, David Kopel seeks to open a second front in the …
A Question Of Intent: Aiding And Abetting Law And The Rule Of Accomplice Liability Under § 924©, Tyler B. Robinson
A Question Of Intent: Aiding And Abetting Law And The Rule Of Accomplice Liability Under § 924©, Tyler B. Robinson
Michigan Law Review
Firearms are common tools of the violent-crime and drugtrafficking trades. Their prevalence is reflected in the frequency with which federal prosecutors charge, juries apply, and courts review 18 U.S.C. §924(c). That provision imposes heavy penalties for either the use or carrying of a firearm "during and in relation to any crime of violence or drug trafficking crime," in addition to the punishment provided for the underlying violent or drug-related offense. A conviction under section 924(c) carries at the very least a mandatory, consecutive five-year sentence, even when the underlying crime already provides enhanced punishment for use of a dangerous weapon …
"Use" And The Irresistible Impulse To Legislate, Robert C. Dorf
"Use" And The Irresistible Impulse To Legislate, Robert C. Dorf
Touro Law Review
No abstract provided.
Some Observations On The Disposition Of Ccw Cases In Detroit, Michigan Law Review
Some Observations On The Disposition Of Ccw Cases In Detroit, Michigan Law Review
Michigan Law Review
Part I of this Note details the disposition of cases alleging violations of the Michigan CCW statute that were brought in the Detroit recorder's court during 1973. Although the statute is only part of the current scheme of gun control in Michigan, it is the principal weapon available to the police and prosecutor in the preventive battle against the illegal use of firearms. To give meaning to the dispositional statistics and to aid in perceiving the over-all judicial attitude toward CCW cases, the statistical results of the study are compared with statistics on the disposition of cases involving felonies similar …