Of Arms and the Law

Navigation
About Me
Contact Me
Archives
XML Feed
Home


Law Review Articles
Firearm Owner's Protection Act
Armed Citizens, Citizen Armies
2nd Amendment & Historiography
The Lecture Notes of St. George Tucker
Original Popular Understanding of the 14th Amendment
Originalism and its Tools


2nd Amendment Discussions

1982 Senate Judiciary Comm. Report
2004 Dept of Justice Report
US v. Emerson (5th Cir. 2001)

Click here to join the NRA (or renew your membership) online! Special discount: annual membership $25 (reg. $35) for a great magazine and benefits.

Recommended Websites
Ammo.com, deals on ammunition
Scopesfield: rifle scope guide
Ohioans for Concealed Carry
Clean Up ATF (heartburn for headquarters)
Concealed Carry Today
Knives Infinity, blades of all types
Buckeye Firearms Association
NFA Owners' Association
Leatherman Multi-tools And Knives
The Nuge Board
Dave Kopel
Steve Halbrook
Gunblog community
Dave Hardy
Bardwell's NFA Page
2nd Amendment Documentary
Clayton Cramer
Constitutional Classics
Law Reviews
NRA news online
Sporting Outdoors blog
Blogroll
Instapundit
Upland Feathers
Instapunk
Volokh Conspiracy
Alphecca
Gun Rights
Gun Trust Lawyer NFA blog
The Big Bore Chronicles
Good for the Country
Knife Rights.org
Geeks with Guns
Hugh Hewitt
How Appealing
Moorewatch
Moorelies
The Price of Liberty
Search
Email Subscription
Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

 

Credits
Powered by Movable Type 6.8.7
Site Design by Sekimori

« Pelosi may fold on Souder bill re DC gun laws | Main | Local story on protection orders »

Reynolds & Denning on Heller's future

Posted by David Hardy · 3 August 2008 11:53 AM

Prof.s Glenn Harlan Reynolds and Brannon Denning have an article in Northwestern Univ. Law Rev. on the future of Heller.

The question is whether the case becomes, essentially, what it should be: the recognition of a Constitutional right, and the beginning of an entire branch of Con law, or whether it may go the route of the Lopez case. In Lopez, the Court struck down the Federal gun-free school zone law because, in limiting simple possession, it had no basis in the interstate commerce power. But the lower courts resisted this, and essentially said "okay, so that statute is invalid. But any other ban on possessing something will be upheld, no matter how flimsy the connection to interstate commerce."

· Parker v. DC

2 Comments | Leave a comment

Letalis Maximus, Esq. | August 3, 2008 12:16 PM | Reply

And like the authors said, the Supremes gave us Lopez. OK, fine, as far as it goes. And some lower courts did go along with that and we had some decisions in the non-commercial child porn area where the courts said that the mere fact that film and cameras traveled in inter-state commerce did not give the Congress Commerce Clause authority to ban the non-commercial making and possessing of child porn. Then the Stewart machine gun decision came out of the 9th Circuit, which said that the Congress lack Commerce Clause authority to ban the home manufacture of a machine gun.

But then along came Raich and the Supremes pulled the rug out from under the whole darned thing. The Court had a chance in Raich to re-affirm Lopez and let all the lower courts know that it was serious about limitations on the Commerce Clause. But noooooooooooooo.

Don Hamrick | August 3, 2008 4:56 PM | Reply

Here's law review article, while not discussing Heller, it presents a possible threat from the States to Heller's legal standing in the future:

Erin Ryan, Federalism and the Tug of War Within: Seeking Checks and Balance in the Interjurisdictional Gray Area, Maryland Law Review, Vol. 66, No. 3, 2007

Available at SSRN.com

Leave a comment