Second Amendment Commons^™

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 …

Mitigating Firearm Suicide With Trusted Messengers In Health Care, Michael Ulrich, Cassandra Devaney

Faculty Scholarship

Voluntary firearm safety actions avoid Second Amendment scrutiny, but rely on individuals recognizing their own risks. This could be aided by a network of healthcare professionals that have received proper training and information about all available tools to help prevent firearm-related suicide attempts, and combining the trust of clinicians and firearm owners could represent an opportunity to inform and educate in a manner that will engage patients.

Building Layered Defenses To Reduce Illegal Gun Violence, Samuel Kan

Faculty Scholarship

This article examines a multifaceted approach to reducing illegal gun violence in the United States through the implementation of layered defense strategies. While acknowledging the constitutional protections afforded by the Second Amendment, the author argues that targeted legislative and community-based interventions can effectively reduce gun violence without infringing on lawful gun ownership rights. The analysis explores several key defensive measures, including extreme risk laws (risk protection orders), which allow for temporary firearm removal from individuals posing credible threats to themselves or others—a practice recently upheld by the Supreme Court in United States v. Rahimi. The article further examines the constitutional …

But For A Free Press: A Response To Press Freedom Skeptics, Kevin F. O'Neill, Patrick J. Charles

Law Faculty Articles and Essays

This Article is divided into three Parts. Part I will outline the history-in-law case forwhy the historical record sufficiently supports recognizing distinct constitutional press freedoms. Part II then provides a history-in-law response to some of the most common arguments made by press freedom skeptics as to why distinct constitutional press freedoms should not be recognized by the courts. Lastly, Part III makes the case for why the recognition of distinct constitutional press freedoms should become a jurisprudential reality and provides a roadmap to accomplish this.

Bruen In A Changing Judiciary, Joseph Blocher

Duke Law Journal Online

No abstract provided.

Judges, Guns, And Maga, Brannon P. Denning

Duke Law Journal Online

No abstract provided.

Unfinished Liberties, Inevitable Balancing, Sherif Girgis

Journal Articles

From the Article

In constitutional liberties cases, the Supreme Court has tried to reduce balancing, understood loosely to mean determining a right’s contours based on sweeping political-moral considerations, not just text and history. It fears that today’s balancing would displace a balance struck by the Founders. Balancing is indeed problematic—but this campaign to end it is bound to fail. Though avoidable for many constitutional rights, balancing is inevitable for general liberties like religion, the Second Amendment, and speech. This inevitability arises not from gaps in text or history but from these liberties’ special role.

General liberties are irreducibly open-ended—not reducible …

Why Domestic Violence Offenders Don't Give Up Their Guns, Natalie Nanasi

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

Perpetrators of intimate partner violence are barred by federal law and many states' laws from possessing firearms. While such prohibitions enjoy popular support, they are sporadically and inconsistently enforced, placing the lives of survivors at risk when offenders do not voluntarily comply. Many experts, including this author, have offered legal and policy solutions to increase the likelihood that perpetrators of domestic violence will either willingly relinquish their guns or otherwise be dispossessed of them. But these proposals may have been premature.

This Article is the first to take a step back and inquire why offenders do not surrender their firearms …

Rahimi And The Future Of (The Rest Of) The Protection Order Prohibition, Bonnie Carlson

Articles

In the summer of 2024, the Supreme Court considered United States v. Rahimi. Scholars and lawyers watched with bated breath to see how the court would interpret and apply the foundation-shifting Second Amendment test it established in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen two years earlier. Ultimately, the Court upheld the federal law which temporarily bans some protection order respondents from possessing firearms. But the Court provided little in the way of additional guidance that lower courts desperately needed as evidenced by the disparate outcomes on gun cases nationwide following Bruen. Rather, the Court opted for a …

Structural Originalism: A Second Amendment Case Study, Ian C. Bartrum

Scholarly Works

“Originalism” is having a national moment, even if it is not entirely clear what the word means. What should we be originalist about? The leading academic approach asks us to parse the communicative content of text ratified in a very different linguistic culture; then construct a modern legal meaning consistent with our semantic speculations. Too often the result enforces policy judgments made in a radically different moral and technological world. This makes very little sense.

In this paper I recommend a more perspicuous and coherent use of constitutional history, which I call “structural originalism.” Rather than saddle ourselves with the …

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 …

Consensus And Conflict Over Context: Select Criminal Law And Procedure Cases From The Supreme Court's 2024-25 Term, Eve Brensike Primus, Elena Schultz

Articles

In its 2024-2025 Term, the Supreme Court emphasized the utility—and necessity—of context-based, fact-sensitive analyses throughout its criminal law and procedure cases. Though the Justices sparred over how to derive meaning from factual, structural, legal, and historical contexts, they tended to agree that courts should not be artificially restricted from considering the breadth of the record before them.

Dangerousness And The Undocumented, Pratheepan Gulasekaram

Publications

The Supreme Court's most recent Second Amendment opinion, United States v. Rahimi, centers the question of dangerousness in right to bear arms challenges. There, the Court upheld 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(8), the federal criminal prohibition on possession of firearms by those subject to a civil domestic violence order, opining that legislatures could regulate the right to bear arms of those who were proven credible threats to public safety. Rahimi, however, left open the question whether dangerousness might be imputed to an entire group, absent individual determinations of threat or danger. The several lower federal court cases adjudicating 18 U.S.C. § …

Loyalty Disarmament And The Undocumented, Pratheepan Gulasekaram

Publications

Since the Supreme Court's District of Columbia v. Heller decision in 2008, lower federal courts have wrestled with Second Amendment claims raised by categories of people excluded from gun possession. Among those cases, several have been brought by noncitizens challenging their prosecutions under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), the federal criminal ban on possession by unlawfully present noncitizens. In the post-Heller § 922(g)(5) cases, judges have opined on whether unlawfully present noncitizens were among "the people" who had the right to bear arms and whether the government regulation met the appropriate level of constitutional scrutiny. More recently, however, the Supreme Court …

Technologies Of Violence: Law, Markets, And Innovation For Gun Safety, Joseph Blocher, Christopher Buccafusco

Faculty Scholarship

Violence in the United States is distinctive in many ways, perhaps none more visceral and fundamental than the technologies with which it is practiced. American violence disproportionately involves guns, and because guns are such an effective tool of violence, confrontations involving them are disproportionately deadly. Decades of research confirm this "instrumentality effect, " and it is reflected in the broad, bipartisan agreement that the nation has a gun violence problem. The deep disagreement, of course, remains about how to address it, with most of the debate focused on regulating who can carry which guns, where, and how.

But fully understanding, …

Judge–Scholar Collaboration And The Second Amendment, Andrew Willinger, Eric Ruben

Faculty Scholarship

Legal scholarship is overly abstract and theoretical, making it unhelpful to judges and lawyers. That, at least, is the classic critique from the bench. When it comes to the Second Amendment, however, a different pattern has emerged: judges consistently cite law review articles and look to the academy for guidance. Most recently, in United States v. Rahimi, some Justices went further, implicitly inviting more scholarly work to help the Court answer open questions raised by its novel methodological approach to the Second Amendment. This Article explores this aberrant trend.

We raise several explanations for the distinctive scholarly role in …

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

Faculty Scholarship

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. …

History And Tradition As Heightened Scrutiny, Andrew Willinger

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court is turning to methodologies privileging text, history, and tradition, or THT, to interpret and implement various constitutional provisions. The Court has recently endorsed historically-focused approaches to determine how the Second Amendment protects the right to keep and carry a firearm, how the First Amendment protects the rights to free speech and freedom of religion, and whether the Due Process Clause protects reproductive autonomy, among other questions.

Much scholarship and popular commentary surrounding THT portrays the methodology as sui generis: presenting unique analytical challenges and impervious to direct comparison to existing doctrinal approaches. However, the jurist most …

A Critique Of Findings On Gun Ownership, Use, And Imagined Use From The 2021 National Firearms Survey: Response To William English, Deborah Azraek, Joseph Blocher, Philip J. Cook, David Hemenway, Matthew Miller

Faculty Scholarship

For a paper that has not yet been through peer review or even been formally published, William English’s “2021 National Firearms Survey” has been remarkably prominent in gun rights advocacy and scholarship. As of December 2024, it has been cited in roughly sixty-five briefs, invoked at oral argument in the Supreme Court and multiple courts of appeals, and regularly cited in public writings and published academic work.

This response is offered in the spirit of a peer review. Our focus is on methodological issues, questionable statistical results, and problematic conclusions. Because of serious methodological issues, English’s draft fails to provide …

The Second Amendment’S Second Sex, Michael Ulrich

Faculty Scholarship

This Essay explores how the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment doctrine perpetuates gender hierarchies and a male monopoly on lethal self-defense. It critiques the narrow “true man” framing that ignores women’s experiences and advocates for a justice-centered framework that incorporates power and privilege into the gun-rights discourse.

The Politics Of Possession And Gun Violence: The Bruen Decision's Impact On Firearm Regulation, Jacob Butler

JCLC Online

States struggle to implement new firearms policies because they are

limited by two major forces: the political feasibility of passing new firearms

legislation and an increasingly broad and individualized Second Amendment

right. Due to this conflict, states continually return to one of few

constitutional yet politically popular methods of gun control: enacting

possession-based firearms laws. These laws are largely ineffective at

reducing gun violence.

In the 2022 Supreme Court decision New York Rifle and Pistol

Association v. Bruen, the Court further expanded the scope of the Second

Amendment to protect the individual’s right to bear arms outside of the …

Garland V. Vanderstok: Brief Of Major Cities Chiefs Association; Police Executive Research Forum; And Current And Former National Security Officials, Law Enforcement Officers, And Prosecutors As Amici Curiae In Support Of Petitioners, Barbara Mcquade

Appellate Briefs

Amici are the Major Cities Chiefs Association, the Police Executive Research Forum, and numerous current and former national security officials, law enforcement officers, and prosecutors.

The Major Cities Chiefs Association (MCCA) is a professional organization of police executives representing the largest cities in the United States and Canada. The mission of MCCA is to provide a forum for police executives from large population centers to address the challenges and issues of policing, to influence national and international policy that affects police services, to enhance the development of current and future police leaders, and to encourage and sponsor research that advances …

What It Takes To Write Statutes That Hold The Firearms Industry Accountable To Civil Justice, Heidi Li Feldman

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This Essay defends statutes creating public nuisance and consumer protection causes of action against firearms industry actors for their failure to take reasonable measures to control the flow of their products to criminal users. Such laws are predicate statutes under PLCAA and do not infringe the Second Amendment.

Trouble’S Bruen: The Lower Courts Respond, Glenn Harlan Reynolds, Brannon P. Denning

Scholarly Works

New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen revolutionized the understanding of how Second Amendment cases are to be adjudicated. Rejecting the tiered-scrutiny analysis around which the lower courts had coalesced since the 2008 Heller decision, the Court instructed courts to look to history and tradition after it was determined that state or federal regulations limited activities that fell within the protections afforded by the Second Amendment's text. Justice Thomas's opinion, however, left open significant questions about how the history-and-tradition method is to operate in practice. The Court recently held oral arguments in United States v. Rahimi, in which …

One Year Post-Bruen: An Empirical Assessment, Eric Ruben, Rosanna Smart, Ali Rowhani-Rahbar

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

In the year after New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, a steady stream of highly publicized opinions struck down a wide range of previously upheld gun restrictions. Courts declared unconstitutional policies ranging from assault weapon bans to domestic abuser prohibitions to various limits on publicly carrying handguns. Those opinions can frequently be paired with others reaching the opposite conclusion. The extent to which Bruen shook up the Second Amendment landscape and has caused widespread confusion in the courts is starting to come into focus.

This Essay measures Bruen’s aftereffects by statistically analyzing a year’s worth …

Reconciling Domestic Violence Protections And The Second Amendment, Natalie Nanasi

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

In March of 2023, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals held that individuals subject to domestic violence protective orders could not be required to give up their guns. The decision was the first of a federal court to overturn a firearm regulation pursuant to New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, a 2022 Supreme Court opinion that created a new standard for determining the constitutionality of gun restrictions. After Bruen, only laws that are “consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation” pass constitutional muster.

The Fifth’s Circuit decision in U.S. v. Rahimi, which …

Scientific Context, Suicide Prevention, And The Second Amendment After Bruen, Eric Ruben

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

The Supreme Court declared in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen that modern gun laws must be “consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation” to survive Second Amendment challenges. Scholarship has shown how this test of historical analogy presents difficulties because of how technological, legal, and social change has shaped policy over the centuries. This Article is the first to assess Bruen as it applies to suicide- prevention laws, and, in doing so, illuminates another form of change that complicates Bruen’s implementation: scientific progress.

As this Article shows, early generations of Americans fundamentally misunderstood mental …

Guns, Vices And Freedom, Oh My: A Preliminary Empirical Investigation, Royce De R. Barondes

Faculty Publications

This Essay estimates factors within States that are associated with per capita firearms ownership and the extent of legal restrictions con-cerning firearms. The metrics are: for the former, a proxy consisting of the fraction of suicides with a firearm; for the latter, Giffords Law Center’s ratings of the restrictiveness of a State’s regulation of fire-arms. For each, the Essay estimates the relationship between it and each of the levels of vices and freedom.

The Giffords score (more restrictions scored higher) is negatively related to the Cato Institute’s measure of overall freedom and regula-tory policy freedom but positively related to Cato’s …

Originalism’S Age Of Ironies, Sherif Girgis

Journal Articles

From the Article

Guns, abortion, religious establishments, Presidential power: While today’s Supreme Court identifies as originalist, it has settled constitutional questions on these and many other issues using history and tradition, not just original meaning. Scholars debate whether this trend can be squared with originalism. Last Term, the originalist Justices joined the fray. A close look at their dueling opinions reveals the divergent paths that originalists take when the method is pressed to its limits. It turns out that the purer one’s originalism at the level of theory, the less it constrains judges in practice. That is especially true for …