|
"The Hidden Second Amendment Framework within District of Columbia v. Heller" Vanderbilt Law Review, Vol. 62, No. 5, pp. 1535-1576, 2009 ANDREW R. GOULD, Vanderbilt University School of Law In District of Columbia v. Heller, the Supreme Court squarely confronted the meaning of the Second Amendment and held that it protected an individual right to keep and bear a firearm for lawful purposes, such as self-defense in the home. Simultaneously, however, the Heller Court refused to set a framework for reviewing Second Amendment claims, leaving the issue open for another day. This issue is crucial: since Heller, lower federal courts have been deluged by Second Amendment claims based on the case, yet such courts have very little guidance as to how to review such claims. This Comment argues that courts have more guidance than they may believe. Using the text of Heller and the constitutional jurisprudence of the Heller majority, this Comment predicts the Second Amendment framework that the Heller majority has in mind or will embrace. Specifically, it articulates a two-pronged test: whether the challenged regulation (1) falls within the scope of the right protected by the Second Amendment, and (2) satisfies a deferential form of strict scrutiny. *******************************************************************
Professor Joseph Olson, J.D., LL.M. o- 651-523-2142 Hamline University School of Law (MS-D2037) f- 651-523-2236 St. Paul, MN 55113-1235 c- 612-865-7956 [email protected] http://law.hamline.edu/node/784 |
_______________________________________________ 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.
