Second Amendment Commons^™

A Second Amendment Quartet - Heller And Mcdonald In The Lower Courts - Introduction, Stephen Kiehl

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

You Kill Me: Why I Don’T Want To Live Around People With Guns, Brandt Goldstein

Other Publications

No abstract provided.

Speaking Truth To Firepower: How The First Amendment Destabilizes The Second, Gregory P. Magarian

Scholarship@WashULaw

When the Supreme Court in District of Columbia v. Heller declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, it set atop the federal judicial agenda the critical task of elaborating the new right’s scope, limits, and content. Following Heller, commentators routinely draw upon the First Amendment’s protections for expressive freedom to support their proposals for Second Amendment doctrine. In this article, Professor Magarian advocates a very different role for the First Amendment in explicating the Second, and he contends that our best understanding of First Amendment theory and doctrine severely diminishes the Second Amendment’s …

Second Things First: What Free Speech Can And Can’T Say About Guns, Joseph Blocher

Faculty Scholarship

Professor Blocher responds to Gregory Magarian’s article on the implications of the First Amendment for the Second.

Mcdonald's Other Right, Samuel L. Wiseman

Scholarly Publications

No abstract provided.

Dead Wrong: Why Washington’S Deadly Weapon Criminal Sentencing Enhancement Needs “Enhancement”, James Harlan Corning

Seattle University Law Review

This Comment confronts the difficult question of how to reformulate the deadly weapon sentencing enhancement to better align it with the policy goals of deterring and punishing armed crime. Part II explores the constitutional and practical defects in each of the three formulations of the sentencing enhancement’s armed requirement by delving into the enhancement’s legislative history and the judicial struggle to interpret it. Part III analyzes the need for a more nuanced approach to the weapon enhancement by exploring key criticisms about the enhancement’s scope and application. Part IV argues that the Washington legislature must provide courts with more rigid …

Guns, Crime Control, And A Systemic Approach To Federal Sentencing, David E. Patton

Cardozo Law Review

Recent scholarship about the role of sentencing reform in reducing high levels of incarceration has focused on evidence-based, offender-specific solutions, such as how to better assess offenders' risk of recidivism and their amenability to diversionary programs. This Article proposes a new, systemic approach. In particular, it suggests that in cases where the primary rationale for steep sentences is crime reduction, as opposed to retributive notions of harm and blameworthiness, judges ought to engage in an evidence-based examination of how the government is making "use" of the sentences it seeks in its law enforcement efforts. And where the government's efforts fall …

Feminists And Firearms: Why Are So Many Women Anti-Choice?, Lindsay K. Charles

Cardozo Journal of Equal Rights & Social Justice

The article argues that gun rights should be recognized as a feminist issue, emphasizing women's autonomy, safety, and equality. It challenges the conventional narrative that gun control aligns with feminist values, asserting that disarming women disempowers them and undermines their ability to defend themselves. The author advocates for women's right to bear arms as a means of self-defense, drawing parallels to other feminist issues like abortion, and proposes a rebuttable presumption for issuing concealed carry permits to women.

The Rise And Demise Of The Collective Right Interpretation Of The Second Amendment, David T. Hardy

Cleveland State Law Review

This article explores the origins of the two competing theories of the Second Amendment -- the "individual rights" approach which carried the majority in Heller and McDonald, and the variants of a "collective right" theory which was previously dominant in the lower courts, and one variant of which was endorsed by the Heller dissents. Careful analysis of states' bills of rights of the Framing period suggests that two guarantees were desired, by different political factions. Framers closely adhering to the Classical Republican point of view favored protection for the militia as a system; those favoring the emerging Jeffersonian point of …

In Search Of A Standard: Gun Regulations After Heller And Mcdonald, Stephen Kiehl

Maryland Law Review

No abstract provided.

Pro-Gun Property Regulation: How The State Of Oklahoma Controls The Property Rights Of Employers Through Firearm Legislation, J. Blake Patton

Oklahoma Law Review

No abstract provided.

Retail Rebellion And The Second Amendment, Darrell A. H. Miller

Faculty Scholarship

When, if ever, is there a Second Amendment right to kill a cop? This piece seeks to answer that question. In District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment codifies a natural right to keep and bear arms for self-defense. That right to self-defense extends to both private and public threats, including self-defense against agents of a tyrannical government. Moreover, the right is individual. Individuals -- not just communities -- have the right to protect themselves from public violence. Individuals -- not just militias -- have the right to defend themselves against tyranny. In McDonald …

Guns, Inc.: Citizens United, Mcdonald, And The Future Of Corporate Constitutional Rights, Darrell A. H. Miller

Faculty Scholarship

The Supreme Court began its 2009 Term by addressing the constitutional rights of corporations. It ended the Term by addressing the incorporated rights of the Constitution. In Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, a five-member majority of the Court held that corporations have a First Amendment right to spend their own money on political advocacy. A corporation generally is no different than a natural person when it comes to the First Amendment - at least as it relates to political speech. In McDonald v. City of Chicago, a plurality of the Court held that the Second Amendment to the United …

The Second Amendment As Interpreted By Congress And The Court, Sean J. Kealy

Faculty Scholarship

In the last two years, the U.S. Supreme Court has finally offered a reasoned interpretation of the Second Amendment. By the slimmest of majorities in District of Columbia v. Heller and McDonald v. City of Chicago, the Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment supplies an individually-held right to bear arms; the government may place reasonable restrictions on gun ownership, but neither the federal government nor an individual state can deprive a person of their right to possess a handgun. Despite many pages of opinion, however, the majority in Heller offers an unsatisfying explanation for why the Second Amendment …

Deactivating The Mousetrap: Entrapment By Estoppel As A Defense To Federal Felon-In-Possession Charges, Madeline Stavis

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

No One Ever Died From Copyright Infringement: The Inducement Doctrine's Applicability To Firearms Manufacturer Liability, Shane Wagman

Cardozo Law Review

No abstract provided.

Fair Measure Of The Right To Vote: A Comparative Perspective On Voting Rights Enforcement In A Maturing Democracy, Janai S. Nelson

Cardozo Journal of International and Comparative Law

The article examines the underenforcement of the right to vote in Ghana, focusing on the exclusion of incarcerated citizens (GICs) despite the 1992 Constitution granting universal adult suffrage. It argues that underenforcement stems from legislative, administrative, and judicial failures, undermining democratic principles. The Ghanaian Supreme Court's decision in OcanseyCHURCIL ruled that denying GICs the right to vote was unconstitutional, aligning with a broader interpretation of voting rights as fundamental. The article emphasizes the importance of explicit constitutional provisions and active enforcement by all government branches to sustain democracy, particularly in emerging democracies.

Where Do We Go From Here? Handgun Regulation In A Post-Heller World, Lindsey Craven

William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal

No abstract provided.

United States V. Mccane: Judge Tymkovich Questions Heller’S Disarming Dicta, Stephen C. Mouritsen

BYU Law Review

No abstract provided.

Prudentialism In Mcdonald V. City Of Chicago, Neil S. Siegel

Faculty Scholarship

At least two kinds of prudential argument have been identified in the literature on constitutional interpretation: court-centered prudentialism and system-centered prudentialism. Commentators often characterize court-centered prudentialism as animated by concern over the Supreme Court’s preservation of its public legitimacy, which can be undermined when the Justices decide controversial questions in ways that cause backlash. By contrast, system-centered prudentialism asks not only what judicial decision is best for the Court’s effectiveness, but also what response is best for the constitutional system as a whole when the Court’s legitimacy is not at stake.

The Court’s recent decision in McDonald v. City of …