Law Commons^™

Must Courts Recalibrate Tort Law Governing Firearms In Light Of The Second Amendment?, Lars Noah

University of Cincinnati Law Review

The rules governing the scope of liability in cases where firearms cause injuries—some well-established, others fairly novel—help to define the responsibilities of users, owners, and sellers of these popular but dangerous products. As the U.S. Supreme Court has recently expanded an individual’s right to keep and bear arms, some have wondered whether the Second Amendment might operate to limit the reach of these various tort doctrines. Sixty years ago, the Court started to constitutionalize various aspects of state common law, most famously using the First Amendment to limit defamation claims but in other respects as well. A comparable approach to …

Recalibrating Bruen: The Merits Of Historical Burden-Shifting In Second Amendment Cases, Kevin G. Schascheck Ii

Belmont Law Review

After Bruen, the prevailing assumption was that the Second Amendment framework shifted radically for all gun laws. Courts throughout the country have already invalidated key gun safety statutes while applying the new test. However, such holdings fail to grapple with the full weight of Second Amendment doctrines. A proper application of the doctrine in toto will result in no significant changes to the constitutionality of the vast majority of gun laws after Bruen.

This Article explains the underdeveloped interaction between two principal Second Amendment doctrines - presumptions of legal validity and historical analyses. That interaction, framed in its simplest terms, …

The Second Amendment's "People" Problem, Pratheepan Gulasekaram -- Professor Of Law

Vanderbilt Law Review

The Second Amendment has a "people" problem. In 2008, District of Columbia v. Heller expanded the scope of the Second Amendment, grounding it in an individualized right of self-protection. At the same time, Heller's rhetoric limited "the people" of the Second Amendment to "law-abiding citizens." In 2022, New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen doubled down on the Amendment's self-defense rationales but, once again, framed the right as one possessed by "citizens." In between and after the two Supreme Court cases, several lower federal courts, including eight federal courts of appeals, wrestled with the question whether the right …

Retconning Heller: Five Takes On New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. V. Bruen, Glenn Harlan Reynolds, Brannon P. Denning

Scholarly Works

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen was the first significant Second Amendment case that the Supreme Court had heard in nearly fifteen years since its decision in District of Columbia v. Heller. This Article offers some preliminary observations about the opinion itself, as well as its likely effects, some of which are starting to manifest

Our first take concerns the question of opinion assignment. Why did Chief Justice Roberts-whose support for the Second Amendment has been suspect-assign the opinion to Justice Thomas?

Takes Two and Three concern Justice Thomas's substitution of text, history, and tradition for …

“What’S Brewin’ With Bruen?” Why, And How, We Must Permit Certain Felons To Possess Firearms, Samuel Roos

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

In the summer of 2022, the U.S. Supreme Court decided New York Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, outlining a new test for the constitutionality of statutes regulating firearm possession. The result has been chaos. In less than a year, U.S.C. § 922(n) and § 922(g)(8), which criminalize possession by specific people involved in the criminal justice system, have been held unconstitutional. Challenges to other federal firearm regulations are flooding the courts.

Notably, § 922(g)(1), which criminalizes possession of a firearm by any person with a felony in their criminal history, has been vigorously challenged. Few courts have yet …

There Is No Bruen Step Zero: The Law-Abiding Citizen And The Second Amendment, Jeff Campbell

University of the District of Columbia Law Review

In District of Columbia v. Heller, 1 the Supreme Court transformed Second Amendment law by adopting an originalist approach in gun-rights cases. Breaking from its previous cases, the Court recognized an individual right to bear arms, at least within the home.2 The Court’s method, while not fully specified, focused on history to determine the meaning of the Second Amendment. 3 But despite the abrupt change in the law, the anticipated revolution never really came. Lower courts turned away nearly every challenge to existing gun laws, sometimes by declining to extend Heller outside the home,4 sometimes by finding that the laws …

Upholding The Domestic Violence Firearm Prohibitors Under Bruen’S Second Amendment, Samantha L. Fawcett

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Federal law prohibits individuals subject to a domestic violence protective order (§ 922(g)(8)) or convicted of domestic violence misdemeanors (§ 922(g)(9)) from possessing firearms. Before New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, these commonsense gun laws had generally been considered uncontroversial, both in terms of their broad popular support and their constitutionality under the Second Amendment. In Bruen, however, the Supreme Court held that when a regulation burdens a Second Amendment right, the regulation must be consistent with American historical tradition, meaning that the regulation must be analogous to a pattern of historical firearm regulation.

After …

Party Alignment On Gun Laws: Urban V.S. Rural, Roz Rozner

Belmont University Research Symposium (BURS)

Mass shootings in the United States have led to debate about gun rights and increased division over the second amendment. Have parties’ positions on gun laws affected voter alignment? This study seeks to determine the effects of restrictive gun laws over time on party alignment within the United States. The urban rural divide in the United States has played a distinctive role in voter alignment on issues like restrictive gun laws. To evaluate this claim, this study uses the Pew Research Center and other opinion polls from the last twenty years to determine whether restrictive gun laws produce higher levels …

Florida Gun Laws Weaken: Another Setback For The Mass Shooting Generation, Riley Kendall

Barry Law Review

While gun control has been a topic of controversy in the United States for decades, one area that has seemed undebatable is the protection of children from gun violence in our Nation’s schools. The methods of achieving this end goal vary from state to state. Some states have continued the longstanding tradition of designating schools as “gun-free zones,” while others have employed armed security guards. Florida has chosen the latter option for its public and charter schools. However, the Florida Legislature has taken a dramatic deviation from this path that will negatively affect students attending private religious schools: it passed …

Using Bruen To Overturn New York Times V. Sullivan, Michael L. Smith, Alexander S. Hiland

Pepperdine Law Review

While New York Times Co. v. Sullivan is a foundational, well-regarded First Amendment case, Justice Clarence Thomas has repeatedly called on the Court to revisit it. Sullivan, Thomas claims, is policy masquerading as constitutional law, and it makes almost no effort to ground itself in the original meaning of the First and Fourteenth Amendments. Thomas argues that at the time of the founding, libelous statements were routinely subject to criminal prosecution—including libel of public figures and public officials. This Essay connects Justice Thomas’s calls to revisit Sullivan to his recent opinion for the Court in New York State Rifle & …

The Spirit Of Gun Laws, Noah Levine

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

The firearms debate in the United States often pits public health against freedom. This false dichotomy implies that gun laws, even wise ones, inherently erode individual liberty. Indeed, this appeal to liberty finds fertile ground in the United States, where many Americans intuitively reject any incursion on their freedom. Yet this one-sided conception of liberty is, at best, incomplete: while the government can certainly encroach on our freedom, so too can our fellow citizens.

A historically grounded conception of liberty in the United States includes the sense of security that fosters self-expression without fear of arbitrary constraint. That is, when …

Second Amendment Sanctuaries: Defiance, Discretion, And Race, Nicholas J. Johnson

Pepperdine Law Review

Second Amendment Sanctuaries deploy nonenforcement policies and strategies in defiance of firearms laws of superior jurisdictions. The scholarship so far has focused on whether Second Amendment Sanctuary policies are legally enforceable. This Article advances the scholarship beyond questions of de jure validity by examining the potential for practical, de facto efficacy of Second Amendment Sanctuary policies. This Article concludes that even where Second Amendment Sanctuaries have weak claims to formal validity, defiant public officials still have broad opportunities to implement Second Amendment Sanctuary policies through the exercise of enforcement discretion. The conclusion that enforcement discretion can effectuate sanctuary policies is …

The Contours Of Gun Industry Immunity: Separation Of Powers, Federalism, And The Second Amendment, Hillel Y. Levin, Timothy D. Lytton

Scholarly Works

In 2005, Congress passed the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), granting the firearms industry sweeping immunity from civil lawsuits. However, PLCAA immunity is not absolute. This Article demonstrates that both state and federal courts have fundamentally misread PLCAA when adjudicating cases involving the scope of gun industry immunity. Properly understood, PLCAA permits lawsuits against the gun industry so long as they are based on statutory causes of action rather than common law. While broadly preempting state common law claims, PLCAA affords state legislatures autonomy in deciding how to regulate the gun industry within their borders.

Additionally, this …

You'll Grow Into It: How Federal And State Courts Have Erred In Excluding Persons Under Twenty-One From 'The People' Protected By The Second Amendment, Ryder Gaenz

FIU Law Review

After more than two centuries of jurisprudential stillness, the United States Supreme Court undertook the task of discerning the Second Amendment’s meaning in District of Columbia v. Heller, holding that the Second Amendment protects the individual right to self-defense. Since Heller, the lower courts have grappled with determining the scope of the Second Amendment. One question of scope—the subject of this piece—is at what age does a person come within the scope of the Second Amendment’s protections? Some federal and state courts have suggested, and in some cases held, that persons under twenty-one do not enjoy Second Amendment rights. However, …

The Second Amendment's "People" Problem, Pratheepan Gulasekaram

Publications

The Second Amendment has a “people” problem. In 2008, District of Columbia v. Heller expanded the scope of the Second Amendment, grounding it in an individualized right of self-protection. At the same time, Heller’s rhetoric limited “the people” of the Second Amendment to “law-abiding citizens.” In 2022, New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen doubled down on the Amendment’s self-defense rationales but, once again, framed the right as one possessed by “citizens.” In between and after the two Supreme Court cases, several lower federal courts, including eight federal courts of appeals, wrestled with the question whether the right …

Originalism-By-Analogy And Second Amendment Adjudication, Joseph Blocher, Eric Ruben

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, the Supreme Court held that the constitutionality of modern gun laws must be evaluated by direct analogy to history, unmediated by familiar doctrinal tests. Bruen’s novel approach to historical decision-making purported to constrain judicial discretion but instead enabled judicial subjectivity, obfuscation, and unpredictability. Those problems are painfully evident in courts’ faltering efforts to apply Bruen to laws regulating 3D-printed guns, assault weapons, large-capacity magazines, obliterated serial numbers, and the possession of guns on subways or by people subject to domestic-violence restraining orders. The Court’s recent grant of certiorari in United …