Second Amendment Commons^™

The Evolution Of The Supreme Court's Second Amendment Jurisprudence, Kermit V. Lipez

Maine Law Review

We live in the shadow of an epidemic of gun violence. We dread the next report of an inevitable mass shooting. We no longer feel secure in public places. We fear for the safety of our children and our grandchildren at their schools. We shake our heads in disbelief at the empty ritual of "thoughts and prayers" for victims and their families. As one commentator put it, we suffer from the "[u]nbearable [m]onotony of [g]rief." Why must we live like this? Why are there no solutions? In conversations posing these questions, there are often references to the Supreme Court's Second …

Dangerous And Unusual: How Heller’S Ahistorical Assumption Violates The Founders’ Original Intent, Oliver Krawczyk, Gilbert Ambler

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

When the U.S. Supreme Court ended its generational silence on the Second Amendment in District of Columbia v. Heller, the Court held that “a prohibition of an entire class of ‘arms’ that is overwhelmingly chosen by American society” is “invalid.” In so holding, the Court suggested that the Constitution protects only those weapons “in common use at the time,” a limitation thought to be “fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’” The Court defined none of these terms then, and it has not since.

Over a decade of constitutional infidelity ensued. …

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 …

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 & …

Dangerous And Unusual: How An Expanding National Firearms Act Will Spell Its Own Demise, Oliver Krawczyk

Dickinson Law Review (2017-Present)

The National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) is the strictest federal gun control law currently in effect. It criminalizes the mere possession and transfer of specifically enumerated categories of firearms deemed to be especially dangerous and unusual, such as machine guns and silencers. Commensurate with this viewpoint, the NFA imposes on violators harsh felony penalties, from lengthy prison sentences to six-figure fines. However, the NFA permits lawful civilian ownership of these firearms under a taxation and registration scheme administered by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). In its 2008 District of Columbia v. Heller decision, the United …

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 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.

Law Of The Gun: Unrepresentative Cases And Distorted Doctrine, Eric Ruben

Faculty Journal Articles and Book Chapters

There is a familiar saying, “If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.” The so-called Law of the Hammer takes a distinctive form in adjudication. If all judges see is one repeating fact pattern for a given area of law, they might perceive it as archetypical and build the law around it. If that fact pattern does not accurately reflect the field, however, the result can be analytical distortion in terms of both the choice of doctrine and its implementation.

This Article uses Second Amendment jurisprudence to illustrate this phenomenon. It reveals how District of Columbia …

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 …

Assault On The Constitution: Why The Southern District Of California Got It Right, Robert F. Brawner Ii

Georgia State University Law Review

This Note will examine and analyze the tests applied by federal courts that have heard similar cases, culminating with the recent decision in the Southern District of California, Duncan v. Becerra. In Part I, this Note provides the context surrounding the current bill being considered by Congress and examines Supreme Court and federal circuit court cases addressing this issue. Part II provides analysis of application of the tests applied by the federal courts. Part III argues that the Supreme Court should adopt Judge Benitez’s reasoning laid out in Duncan and apply his test to any Second Amendment challenge to …

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 …

A Public Health Law Path For Second Amendment Jurisprudence, Michael Ulrich

Faculty Scholarship

The two landmark gun rights cases, District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, came down in 2008 and 2010, respectively. In the decade that has followed, two things have become abundantly clear. First, these cases provide little clarity about the nature and scope of Second Amendment rights, resulting in chaos and circuit splits in the lower courts. Second, growing empirical evidence has revealed that, in the background of the debate on individual constitutional rights, a serious gun violence epidemic is intensifying around the country. In one corner, gun rights advocates worry that increased firearm regulation will …

The Diverging Right(S) To Bear Arms: Private Armament And The Second And Fourteenth Amendments In Historical Context, Alexander Gouzoules

Faculty Publications

This article compares the historical evolution of the social understanding of private armament with contemporary legal doctrine on the right to bear arms. The District of Columbia v. Heller decision, which held that the Second Amendment protects a personal right to self-defense, and the McDonald v. City of Chicago decision, which held the Second Amendment to be incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment, both turned on extensive historical analysis. But by reading a broad “individual right to self-defense” into both the Second and Fourteenth Amendments, the Court assumed continuity between the social understandings at the time of these amendments’ respective ratifications. …

Won't You Be My Neighbor: Meza-Rodriguez, The Second Amendment, And The Constitutional Rights Of Noncitizens, Blair E. Wessels

West Virginia Law Review

No abstract provided.

Guns N' Ganja: How Federalism Criminalizes The Lawful Use Of Marijuana, Ira P. Robbins

Scholarly Articles in Law Reviews & Journals

Federalism is a vital tenet of our Republic. Although federal law is the supreme law of the land, our Constitution recognizes the integral role that state law plays in the national scheme. Like any pharmaceutical drug that withstands rounds of clinical testing, state law functions as a laboratory in which Congress can evaluate and potentially adopt novel policies on a nation-wide basis. Most of the time, federal and state law exist harmoniously, complementing one another; other times, however, the two systems clash, striking a dissonant chord.

In the United States, state marijuana laws are currently on a crash course with …

Gun Rights And The New Lochnerism, Areto A. Imoukuede

Journal Publications

This Article examines the Supreme Court's recent Second Amendment cases as applications of the same libertarian bias that has undermined constitutional law's fundamental rights doctrine. The concept of a libertarian bias that is based in a New Lochnerism was previously introduced in both The Fifth Freedom and The New Due Process. The analysis here demonstrates that the recently revised doctrine regarding the Second Amendment and gun rights is driven by the current Supreme Court ("Court") hostility towards government regulation in a manner that is akin to what was seen during the Lochner Era. Regrettably, this Article is timely and is …

Docs Versus Glocks: N.R.A. Takes Aim At Florida Physicians’ Freedom Of Speech: Leaving Patients’ Health, Safety, And Welfare At Risk, Michelle Foody

Cardozo Law Review de•novo

Part I of this Note provides background on the Act at issue, its legislative history, the current status of the Supreme Court’s free speech jurisprudence, and it also introduces the constitutional interests at stake. Part II considers the constitutionality of the Act under the existing First Amendment standard and addresses the State’s assertions under the Second Amendment. Part III proposes that the Court’s standard ought to be recalibrated, taking into account the would-be listeners’ cognizable interest in the information. Part III goes on to legitimate the proposal by reconciling this new examination standard with existing free speech jurisprudence and justifications, …

Guns And Ammo: For Convicted Americans Viewing Pictures Of Others Enjoying Their Constitutional Right To Bear Arms In A Magazine Is The Closest They Will Ever Get To Seeing The Second Amendment At Work - People V. Hughes, Ronald P. Perry

Touro Law Review

No abstract provided.

Unenumerated Rights And The Limits Of Analogy: A Critque Of The Right To Medical Self-Defense, O. Carter Snead

Journal Articles

Volokh’s project stands or falls with the claim that the entitlement he proposes is of constitutional dimension. If there is no fundamental right to medical self-defense, the individual must, for better or worse, yield to the regulation of this domain in the name of the values agreed to by the political branches of government. Indeed, the government routinely restricts the instrumentalities of self-help (including self-defense) in the name of avoiding what it takes to be more significant harms. This same rationale accounts for current governmental limitations on access to unapproved drugs and the current ban on organ sales. The FDA …

Natural Rights And The Second Amendment, Steven J. Heyman

All Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

Plenary Power And Constitutional Outcasts: Federal Power, Critical Race Theory, And The Second, Ninth, And Tenth Amendments , Nicholas J. Johnson

Faculty Scholarship

Rights and power in modern American constitutionalism are conceptually interdependent: "We have no way of thinking about constitutional rights independent of what powers it would be prudent or desirable for government to have." In an era where substantive boundaries on federal power seem ephemeral, this suggests that what we call rights may be primarily fair weather or illusory barriers to the exercise of power.From a majoritarian perspective, the shifting boundary between rights and powers, and the capacity of power to consume rights, may be unproblematic and even attractive. If the exercise of plenary power reflects majority will, then this exercise …