Second Amendment Commons^™

Volume 49 Masthead

Seattle University Law Review

Volume 49 Masthead

A Comparative Study Of Chinese And American Approaches To Shaping International Outer Space Law And Norms, Ariel G. Silverman

Seattle University Law Review

This article explores convergences and divergencies in the United States and PRC’s responses to the stalemate in the United Nations over the future of outer space resource governance. I do so by systematically analyzing these leading space-faring nations’ policy-positions and tactics deployed to shape norms around three substantive areas of outer space resource governance: rights of ownership and scope of utilization of space resources, mechanization of the “benefits sharing” principle, and the rights and responsibilities of the private sector. I theorize that these leading space-faring nations have adopted divergent approaches due to their differing historical relationships with international law and …

Table Of Contents

Seattle University Law Review

Table of Contents

In Guns We Trust: Nfa Firearm Trusts And Silencing The Hazards Of Nfa Firearm Ownership, Carter Horton

Arkansas Law Review

Individual ownership of firearms has been one of the storied rights of our country. During the Founding Era, firearms were plentiful among the colonists, providing them with protection and the means to hunt for food to sustain their communities. With a rebellion brewing against Great Britain, the ill-equipped colonial governments primarily relied upon the personal arms of their people for defense. Arguably, this fundamental right to bear arms played an important role in sparking the American Revolutionary War at the Battles of Lexington and Concord, in which the British attempted to seize an arms cache from the colonists. The subsequent …

The Fallacies Of Originalism: Why Treating History And Tradition Alone As Dispositive Is Not Superior To The Tiers Of Scrutiny, Gage A. Johnson

Cleveland State Law Review

The goal of this Article is to develop the current history and tradition standard. I argue that the Bruen use of history and tradition is not a more principled or better way of interpreting the Constitution than the infamous tiers of scrutiny. This argument is supported by analyzing the way the Court has used history and tradition in reviewing restrictions on the Second Amendment and the push for it to be used under the First Amendment. I argue that Justice Thomas’s rigid application of history and tradition is essentially an ends-justifying-the-means analysis that is no different than the so called …

The Second Amendment Right To Bear Arms, Or Lack Thereof: Assessing The Prohibition Of Unlawful Immigrants From Possessing Firearms, Anna Egensperger

Et Cetera

This Note looks at the hot button issue of whether unlawful immigrants should have the constitutional right to bear arms. Thus far, the Circuit Courts have come to different conclusions which require the input of the United States Supreme Court. Although intertwined with political views, this Note attempts to take a non-partisan stance which prioritizes the application of case law and a consistent reading of the Constitution. To provide the full context of this issue, this Note begins by describing the facts and holding of Columbia v. Heller which creates the first test for establishing a right protected under the …

The Second Amendment, Illegal Aliens, And The Bruen Test: Defending The Constitutionality Of 18 U.S.C. § 922(G)(5), Ian Duncan

Cleveland State Law Review

This Note examines the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5), which prohibits unlawful aliens from possessing firearms, under the Supreme Court’s text-and-history framework announced in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n, Inc. v. Bruen and developed further in United States v. Rahimi. In the wake of Bruen, lower courts have fractured over how strictly to demand historical analogues and how to treat longstanding status-based restrictions in § 922, including prohibitions on possession by felons, domestic-violence offenders, and noncitizens. Against that backdrop, this Note argues that § 922(g)(5) is constitutionally sound.

Part I traces the development of Second …

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 …

The Impact Of Extreme Risk Protection Orders On Homicide And Suicide: Are There Any Red Flags?, K. Alexander Adams

Wyoming Law Review

Twenty-two states have instituted Extreme Risk Protection Order (ERPO) laws, also known as red flag laws. These laws allow law enforcement, family members, and others to petition courts to temporarily seize firearms from an individual believed to be a danger to themselves or others. These laws have been passed with the goal of reducing firearm-related homicide and suicide. This Article tests whether these laws save lives by using a generalized synthetic control model, improving upon the previously used difference-in-difference and standard synthetic control models. This preliminary study suggests ERPOs, as currently written, fail to statistically significantly reduce total homicide, total …

Heller Was Egregiously Wrong And Should Be Overruled, Henry J. Renk

Roger Williams University Law Review

No abstract provided.

Assessing Liability For School Shootings, Nanci K. Carr

Mitchell Hamline Law Journal of Public Policy and Practice

No abstract provided.

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

Faculty Articles

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 …

How To Stop Mass Shootings Without Violating The Second Amendment: Designing Regulations To Prevent Acts Of Mass Violence That Pass The 6:3 History And Tradition Test, Robert D'Alessandro

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article proposes that states can constitutionally implement ammunition possession limits to reduce mass violence by aligning such laws with the "history and tradition" test established by the current Supreme Court. It argues that modern caps on ammunition are analogous to early American gunpowder restrictions, which were enacted for public safety to prevent catastrophic explosions in populated areas.

Nonviolent Felony Offenders And The Second Amendment: Reexamining Categorical Disarmament Laws In Light Of Bruen And Rahimi, Nikolay Belardi

American University Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law

INTRODUCTION: The Second Amendment ensures that “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” In a country with more civilian-owned firearms than people—and more gun dealers than McDonald’s, Burger King, Subway, and Wendy’s locations combined—it is no surprise that Americans pride themselves on their right to bear arms. However, a majority of the American population favors stricter gun laws and regulations, a position that seems sensible given that mass shootings are an all-too-familiar occurrence in the United States. The enshrinement of the right to bear arms in the Constitution limits the laws and regulations …

American Loopholes: What Are They, And How Do We Close Them?, Tanner L. Martin

Wyoming Law Review

This Comment examines the existence and impact of alleged loopholes within American gun control laws and explores how these gaps may affect Constitutional rights, legal enforcement, and public safety. In addition to identifying trends in American gun ownership, including patterns of purchasing, possession, and regulatory compliance, this Comment analyzes the current legal standards that determine who is disqualified from owning or possessing a firearm under federal law. These categories include individuals with certain criminal convictions, domestic violence restrictions, or mental health adjudications, and how those legal standards are applied in practice.

Beyond the legal framework, this Comment also considers the …

The Ambitions Of History And Tradition In And Beyond The Second Amendment, Joseph Blocher, Reva B. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines the ambitions of history-and-tradition review in and beyond the Second Amendment. In Bruen and Rahimi, the Roberts Court rejected means-end review in favor of a historical-analogical approach, claiming to constrain the exercise of judicial discretion and thus to promote the democratic decisions of the founders. But our examination of these cases shows that the Court has created new opportunities for judges to advance their values in considerably less transparent ways. We identify contexts in which Second Amendment doctrine enables judicial discretion, key among them that it allows judges to reason about gun rights and regulation at disparate …

Revisiting “Of Arms And The Militia: Gun Regulation By Legislatively Defining ‘Ordinary Military Equipment’”, Edward J. Curtis ,Jr.

Touro Law Review

In 2021, I published an article arguing that semi-automatic rifles and semi-automatic handguns, among other weapons, could be most effectively regulated by defining the “ordinary military equipment” that the states’ militia members were expected to produce in the event they were called to service. I based my argument on the rationale employed by the United States Supreme Court in its 1939 decision in United States v. Miller, which upheld the National Firearms Act of 1934.

Cumulative Burdens On Second Amendment Rights, Joseph Blocher, Hayley Lawrence

Faculty Scholarship

No abstract provided.

The Right To Keep And Bear Arms In Georgia, John R. Monroe

Mercer Law Review

This Article provides a survey of the right to keep and bear arms in Georgia as it has developed from colonial times to the present. While this Article is not about the Second Amendment, references to that amendment cannot be avoided because the two are intertwined.

The Article follows Georgia’s right to keep and bear arms in roughly chronological order, where discreet periods in history can be seen to have heavy influence on laws impacting the right to keep and bear arms. These periods include Colonial, Antebellum, Civil War years, Reconstruction and late nineteenth century, early twentieth century, and finally …