What 1937 property law/decision is Chermerinsky referring to?

Somehow, I doubt that it was used to overturn a right of the people
enumerated in the Bill of Rights.

But what do I know?  I'm not going to be Dean of my own law school.

I do know that I'd not recommend his new law school -- and that Duke's
Law School ranking ought to improve with it's upcoming vacancy.

   --jcr


> http://www.nj.com/opinion/ledger/perspective/index.ssf?/base/news-1/1196055348253430.xml&coll=1
>  
> <http://www.nj.com/opinion/ledger/perspective/index.ssf?/base/news-1/1196055348253430.xml&coll=1>
>  
> 

> “Under this approach, it would not matter which view of the Second 
> Amendment is adopted by the Supreme Court. Under either 
> [individual/collective], the District of Columbia law would be upheld 
> because the government has a legitimate interest in discouraging gun 
> violence, and prohibiting ownership of guns is a reasonable way to 
> attain the goal … the Supreme Court should simply say whatever the 
> meaning of the Second Amendment, gun control laws are allowed so long as 
> they are reasonable.”

_______________________________________________
To post, send message to [email protected]
To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see 
http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/firearmsregprof

Please note that messages sent to this large list cannot be viewed as private.  
Anyone can subscribe to the list and read messages that are posted; people can 
read the Web archives; and list members can (rightly or wrongly) forward the 
messages to others.

Reply via email to