Second Amendment Commons^™

Locked And Unloaded: The Constitutional And Empirical Case For Firearm Safe Storage Advisories, Hillel Y. Levin, Kay L. Levine

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Constitutional law haunts our efforts to reduce the number of firearm deaths each year. But even with the evolving scope of individual rights, sensible regulation remains possible.

This Article proposes one such regulatory tool. State governments legally can and pragmatically should require firearm sellers to advise their customers of the association between improper gun storage and the risk of accidental death and suicide. Mandatory safe storage advisories implicate two strands of constitutional jurisprudence: the First Amendment’s protection against compelled speech and the Second Amendment’s right to bear arms. While the Supreme Court has strengthened both doctrines in recent years, jurisdictions …

Freedom At The Polls: Guns, Speech, And The Right To Vote, Matthew B. Russett

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Part I of this Note provides a brief overview of current firearm prohibitions at polling locations and examines the legislative justifications for these restrictions. Recently, an increasing number of states have enacted firearm prohibitions as a prophylactic measure against voter intimidation and disruption. Part II applies New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen’s history and tradition test to determine whether these prohibitions pass constitutional muster under the Second Amendment. Indeed, a critical examination of historical voting laws in America shows a compelling history of limiting firearms near polling locations. Part III examines similar themes in First Amendment …

Is Bruen The New Usery?, Tonja Jacobi, Cory Conley

William & Mary Law Review

In 2022, in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, the Supreme Court revolutionized the Second Amendment, achieving the long-held conservative goal of limiting gun restrictions by imposing an expansive, originalist view of the right to bear arms. However, within just three years, Bruen is showing cracks. Lower court judges are struggling mightily to apply it and are expressing their frustrations in exceptionally frank ways. And already the Supreme Court, in Rahimi v. United States, was forced to reconsider its approach. The Court has been here before, when it tried to revitalize the Tenth Amendment in …

Challenging Gun Industry Immunity, Matthew Platkin

William & Mary Law Review Online

Keynote Address of the William & Mary Law Review Volume 67 Symposium.

Federal Extreme Risk Protection Orders: A Potential Pathway To Preventing Mass Shootings, Lilly H. Donahue

William & Mary Journal of Race, Gender, and Social Justice

This Note examines how the creation and implementation of a federal extreme risk protection order (ERPO) statute would impact federal investigations, mass shooting prevention, and the reduction of firearm deaths at large. While ERPOs exist in several states, there is currently no federal statutory scheme to allow federal law enforcement agencies to pursue ERPOs against citizens at risk of harming themselves or others with firearms. By examining the current legal landscape of state-level ERPOs, federal agencies’ investigatory procedures and failures, constitutional and racial equity concerns, and industry best practices, this Note aims to explore what a federal ERPO statute could …

Is History Precedent?, Allison Orr Larsen

Faculty Publications

It has been just over three years since the Supreme Court instructed lower courts to evaluate Second Amendment challenges by examining history and tradition. And it is no secret that the courts have struggled. This Article tackles a phenomenon that is born of that struggle. Overwhelmed by the task of evaluating historical claims, lower courts instead are turning to other judges as authorities on history. They are using what I call in this Article “historical precedents”—meaning language about history from an older decision that the subsequent judge then treats as authority, not as part of a legal rule but for …

Firearms And Fora: Constructing Public Carry Doctrine, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

Where can a person lawfully carry firearms in public? Under what conditions can they do so? Now that the Supreme Court has formally recognized a Second Amendment right to public carry, these are among the most important unresolved questions regarding the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment’s public carry doctrine is in its infancy. How the doctrine develops will have a profound impact on the exercise of Second Amendment rights in public places and on the public square. Integrating a new constitutional right into the public square is not a novel problem. After the Supreme Court recognized First Amendment …

Teaching Firearms Law: One Big Opportunity And Three Pedagogical Challenges, Joseph Blocher, Jacob D. Charles, Darrell A.H. Miller

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The U.S. Supreme Court’s groundbreaking 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller ushered in a new era for the Second Amendment: one in which the right to keep and bear arms, long dormant as a matter of practical impact and even “embarrassing” as a matter of legal scholarship, vaulted into the front ranks of constitutional law. The Court itself has only revisited the Amendment a few times since then—albeit once by revolutionizing the doctrine. Meanwhile, lower courts have issued thousands of decisions giving shape to the right, while scholars have generated work that is increasingly deep, diverse, and challenging. …

Second Amendment Principles, Jamie G. Mcwilliam

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

In United States v. Rahimi, the Supreme Court explained that firearm regulations “must comport with the principles underlying the Second Amendment.” This Article examines what those principles are, how to derive them, and how to apply them in concrete cases. It begins with the Second Amendment’s core principle of defense of self and community, which traces its lineage back to classical thinkers like Aquinas and Grotius. The tradition of firearm regulation that surrounded the adoption of the Second Amendment depended on this fundamental principle. But it also developed subsidiary principles that implement the defense principle in specific ways. This …

History's Identity Crisis, Allison Orr Larsen

Faculty Publications

Lower court judges across the country are struggling to manage the Supreme Court’s new “history and tradition” test that applies to Second Amendment challenges. This Article articulates one fundamental reason for the struggle: nobody is quite sure what a judge is actually doing when she evaluates claims about what happened in the past. Is it traditional legal reasoning— weighing evidence and looking for patterns? Is it fact-finding of the sort we think expert historians should testify about—conveying to a trial judge the best evidence we have about the purpose of colonial gun laws? Or is it a different sort of …

Section 898: Targeting The Companies Behind Gun Violence In New York With Public Nuisance Doctrine, Mara Kravitz

William & Mary Law Review

On July 6, 2021, the New York State Legislature enacted sections 898-a to -e of the New York General Business Law (section 898), creating a clear path for public entities and private gun violence victims to sue gun industry members for their role in the gun violence public nuisance in New York. This Note explores why the legislature took a public nuisance approach to curbing gun violence, framing section 898 within public nuisance doctrine’s broader common law history and legal elements.

To unpack how and why New York took this approach, the first Part of this Note traces the history …

The Corporate Right To Bear Arms, Robert E. Wagner

William & Mary Business Law Review

The ability of a corporation to exercise constitutional protections has been rife with uncertainty and change since the conception of corporate rights came into existence. The history and rapid development of the corporation, combined with the misapplied and misunderstood “corporate personhood” theory, have resulted in an almost unintelligible hodgepodge of corporate constitutional applications. Similarly, the concept of the right to bear arms has equally been muddled and applied very differently at varying times and locations since before the establishment of the Second Amendment. This Article attempts to clarify how an alternative to the “corporate personhood” theory, namely the “purpose” theory …

Second Amendment Exceptionalism: Public Expression And Public Carry, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

In New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, the Supreme Court recognized a right to carry firearms in public places. The scope of that right will depend on where, why, and how governments regulated public carry during the eighteenth and perhaps nineteenth centuries. The Court claimed that its turn to history for determining the scope of Second Amendment rights “accords with” and “comports with” how the Court has interpreted First Amendment rights. This Article examines and rejects that claim, both in general and specifically as it applies to the public exercise of Second Amendment rights. Although Bruen …

Twilight-Zone Originalism: The Peculiar Reasoning And Unfortunate Consequences Of New York State Pistol & Rifle Association V. Bruen, Albert W. Alschuler

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article consists of two Parts and a conclusion. Part I focuses on the Bruen opinion and considers its contradictions, flaws, fallacies, and implications. Part II examines lower-court decisions applying Bruen during the first year after that decision. These decisions make Bruen’s flaws vivid.

This abstract has been taken from the author's introduction.

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

William & Mary Law Review

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 …

Let My People Go, Part Two: The Second Amendment Political Necessity Defense And The Storming Of Capital Hill, Kindaka Sanders

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The Article examines the traditional political necessity defense, extracting elements that are compatible with the Second Amendment and discarding elements that are not. The Article also explores the historical and legal background of the right to rebel and then uses the right to rebel to define the contours of the Second Amendment political necessity defense. Finally, the Article applies the Second Amendment political necessity defense to the storming of the Capitol on January 6, 2020.

Part I of this Article discusses the constitutional basis for the political necessity defense. Part II articulates the political necessity doctrine refined by its Second …

Let My People Go, Part One: Black Rebellion And The Second Amendment Political Necessity Defense, Kindaka Sanders

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article argues that when an individual or group acts to protect a government-assailed constitutional right by criminal means, the doctrine of political necessity may serve as a constitutionally protected defense. The doctrine of political necessity builds on the common law doctrine of necessity. The necessity doctrine, also referred to as the “choice of evils” defense, exonerates an individual who creates a social harm to allay a greater harm to herself or others. Both state and federal courts have been especially reluctant to allow the use of the necessity defense in cases with political implications, in which the defendant acts …

The Collective Right Endures: Pre-Heller Precedent And Our Understanding Of The Modern Second Amendment, William Reach

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Prior to 2008, legal scholars who examined the Second Amendment fell roughly into two camps: those who believed “the right of the people to . . . bear arms” only covered state militias, and those who believed it extended to individual citizens.

After District of Columbia v. Heller conclusively established that the “Second Amendment conferred an individual right to keep and bear arms," discussion of the collective right to bear arms largely receded from public discussion and most litigation surrounding the Second Amendment shifted to define the outer edges of the individual right. But the pre-Heller showdown between these …

The Right To Train: A Pillar Of The Second Amendment, Joseph G.S. Greenlee

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Since the Supreme Court confirmed that the Second Amendment protects “the individual right to possess and carry weapons” in District of Columbia v. Heller, lower courts have been grappling with whether there is also a right to train with those weapons. Courts have considered whether training is a protected activity, whether it is a “core” right, and whether its protection is limited to gaining the minimum competency needed for self-defense.

[...]

No court yet has explored the legal history of the right to train, nor has any article. This Article presents the first in-depth historical exploration of the right. …

Abortion Litigation And Second Amendment Litigation After Dobbs And Bruen, Institute Of Bill Of Rights Law, William & Mary Law School

Supreme Court Preview

No abstract provided.

The Next Fight Over Guns In America, Timothy Zick, Diana Palmer

Popular Media

With Thursday’s Supreme Court decision [in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen], the only real remaining question is not whether Americans can carry firearms, but where.

The Constitutional Right To Carry Firearms On Campus, Jared A. Tuck

William & Mary Law Review

Do individuals have the fundamental right under the Second Amendment to carry firearms on the campus of a public university? Additionally, can a public university totally ban firearms on its campus without impeding on the constitutional right to keep and bear arms protected by the Second Amendment? This Note will argue that individuals have a narrow, but constitutionally guaranteed, right to carry firearms on the campus of a public university. Therefore, it is beyond the power of states and public universities to totally ban firearms from campus premises.

Regulating Armed Private Militia Gatherings: A Constitutional State-Level Proposal To Promote Public Safety In A Post-Heller World, Sean Tenaglia

William & Mary Law Review

“Yesterday, in my view, was one of the darkest days in the history of our nation.” President Joseph R. Biden spoke these words following the January 6, 2021 riots at the U.S. Capitol Building that left five people, including a police officer, dead. The mob that stormed the Capitol sought to prevent Congress from certifying then-President-elect Biden’s Electoral College victory. In the weeks following the riot, investigators began arresting rioters associated with extremist right-wing militia groups, such as the Oath Keepers and Three Percenters. While January 6, 2021, can accurately be labeled a dark day in American history, the events …

The Second Amendment Has Become A Threat To The First, Diana Palmer, Timothy Zick

Popular Media

No abstract provided.

Judging History: How Judicial Discretion In Applying Originalist Methodology Affects The Outcome Of Post-Heller Second Amendment Cases, Mark Anthony Frassetto

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

This Article aims to assess how the federal appellate courts have applied the originalist methodology in Second Amendment cases in the decade since Heller. It reviews how courts’ varying approaches to historical analysis—specifically, how courts have addressed what historical period to look to, how prevalent a historical tradition must be, and whether to address history at a high or low level of generality—can drastically affect the outcome of cases. As Justice Scalia acknowledged in McDonald, “Historical analysis can be difficult; it sometimes requires resolving threshold questions, and making nuanced judgments about which evidence to consult and how to …

Second Amendment Background Principles And Heller's Sensitive Places, Adam B. Sopko

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

Judges and commentators have widely acknowledge that history enjoys a privileged status in Second Amendment cases, but its precise role is undertheorized and rarely controls case outcomes. In particular, courts have been unable to decide "sensitive places" cases-- challenges to location-based gun laws-- in a manner that adheres to Supreme Court precedent because existing Second Amendment doctrine lacks a test for sensitive places cases that uses history and tradition in a principled way. This Article proposes a solution to address that problem.

An untapped source of guidance is the Court's takings jurisprudence. Interpreting their respective constitutional provisions, Justice Scalia observed …

Framing The Second Amendment: Gun Rights, Civil Rights And Civil Liberties, Timothy Zick

Faculty Publications

Gun rights proponents and gun control advocates have devoted significant energy to framing the constitutional right to keep and bear arms. In constitutional discourse, advocates and commentators have referred to the Second Amendment as a "collective, ""civic republican," "individual," and 'fundamental" right. Gun rights advocates have defended the right to keep and bear arms on "law and order" grounds, while gun control proponents have urged regulation based on "public health, " "human rights, " and other concerns. These frames and concepts have significantly influenced how the right to keep and bear arms has been debated, interpreted, and enforced. This Article …

Constitutional Conflict And Sensitive Places, Darrell A. H. Miller

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Political And Non-Political Speech And Guns, Gregory P. Magarian

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

Doctrinal Dynamism, Borrowing, And The Relationship Between Rules And Rights, Joseph Blocher, Luke Morgan

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

The study of “Rights Dynamism,” exemplified in Timothy Zick’s new book on the First Amendment’s relationship with the rest of the Bill of Rights, can enrich our understanding of constitutional rights. It also opens a door to another potentially fruitful arena: what we call “Doctrinal Dynamism.” Constitutional rights often interact and generate new meanings and applications by way of importing and exporting one another’s doctrinal rules, even when the rights themselves do not intersect directly in the context of a single case. Focusing on these doctrinal exchanges can illuminate the strengths and weaknesses of various rules, the specific interests underlying …