Welcome to MGO's Internet Discussion Forums…Please Consider Becoming a Dues-Paying Member of the ORG…Click >>>>>HERE<<<<< for more info…………****DONATIONS**** can also be made toward MGO's Legal Defense Fund and/or MGO's Forums >>>>>HERE<<<<<

Firearms Legal Protection

Results 1 to 2 of 2
  1. #1
    I am a Forum User
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    West of Bravo
    Posts
    7,512

    Retconning Heller: Five Takes on SCOTUS' Bruen Decision by Denning & Reynolds

    Two pro gun professors of law, Brannon Denning and Glenn Harlan Reynolds, have some interesting observations on the 2022 New York Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen decision rendered by the Supreme Court of the United States:

    https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....act_id=4372216

    Abstract

    New York Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen was the first significant Second Amendment case that the Supreme Court had heard in over a decade since its decision in District Columbia v. Heller. It was one of the most highly anticipated case of the 2021-22 Term and serves as the first indication of how the addition of Justices Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett might alter the trajectory of the Court’s Second Amendment case law.

    If Heller could have been characterized as a “minimalist” opinion at the time of its decision and McDonald v. Chicago as an almost overdetermined extension of Heller by its application to the states through incorporation, Bruen tends towards maximalism, dramatically expanding the scope of the Second Amendment and threatening a variety of gun control laws that lower courts had upheld while the Court stayed its hand. Given that there is now a solid majority (if not a super-majority) willing to support a robust Second Amendment, whatever Bruen’s ultimate scope, it is unlikely that the Court will be as quiescent as it was in the decade following Heller.

    This essay offers some preliminary observations about both the opinion itself, as well as its likely effects, some of which are starting to manifest. Our first take concerns the question of opinion assignment. Why did Chief Justice Roberts—whose support for the Second Amendment had been suspect—assign the opinion to Justice Thomas?

    Takes two and three concern Justice Thomas’s substitution of text, history, and tradition for tiered-scrutiny; and his call for courts to adopt analogical reasoning should the former fail to provide answers to resolve particular cases. In rejecting tiered-scrutiny, Thomas argued that the lower courts had misread the Heller decision itself; that Heller rejected tiered-scrutiny in favor of a textual, historical, and traditional inquiry. In order to make Bruen seem less like an abrupt departure, we argue, Justice Thomas had to “retcon” Heller—reading back into the latter decision the analytical framework adopted in Bruen. We also question how helpful his explanation of the method for analogizing to other extant gun regulations when history and tradition have run out is likely to be to lower courts who have to rehear cases involving dozens of issues delineating the scope of the Second Amendment settled over the last fifteen years since Heller.

    Take Four wonders about the status of what we earlier termed “the Heller safe harbor”—the list of “presumptively lawful” regulations that the Court said were not called into question by the decision. Critics at the time questioned whether these could be squared with the self-conscious originalism of the rest of the opinion. This tension is only heighted by Bruen’s text-history-tradition only approach.

    Finally, in keep with our longstanding interest in lower court reception of destabilizing, possibly transformative Supreme Court opinions, we look at the reaction of the lower courts, post-Bruen. While approaches differ, a surprising number of these opinions seem to recognize Bruen for the sea-change it portends and are attempting to implement it in good faith. Although as was true with cases like United States v. Lopez and Heller itself, some courts are also trying to avoid the wider implications of Bruen using any available argument, however specious; and we detect in some an “uncivil obedience” intended to raise the Supreme Court’s costs of holding the line laid down in Bruen. A brief conclusion follows.
    The entire 35 page paper can be downloaded in PDF format at:

    https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/Deliver...372216&mirid=1

    Glenn Harlan Reynolds is justifiably famous as the 'Instapundit'.

  2. #2
    Administrator dramey82's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Lake Orion, Mi Mebmber #827
    Posts
    12,216
    " Legal Beagle is one of the greatest assets on this forum. Even more valuable than the marketplace, in my opinion. It’s not a general discussion forum. It’s here so users can ask specific legal questions, to be responded to with accurate, verifiable information. "

    https://www.migunowners.org/forum/sh...L-BEAGLE-FORUM

    Moved from the Legal forum to General Firearms Discussion forum.
    " It's not about the size of the circle, it's the loyalty in it. "

    " A man’s rights rest in three boxes: the ballot box, the jury box and the cartridge box.” - Frederick Douglass

    " When one with honeyed words but evil mind Persuades the mob, great woes befall the state." - Euripides, Orestes

    " America will never be destroyed from the outside. If we lose our freedoms it will be because we have destroyed ourselves from within." - Unknown

    DISCLAIMER: The opinions expressed in my posts are my own and do not reflect the opinions, views, or official policies of Michigan Gun Owners.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
only search Michigan Gun Owners Forums
MGO's Facebook MGO's Twitter