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 6.8.8
Site Design by Sekimori

« Bloomberg seems to be losing it | Main | Interesting tactic.... »

Louisiana passes constitutional provision mandating strict scrutiny

Posted by David Hardy · 7 November 2012 08:46 AM

Louisiana has become the first State with a constitutional provision mandating strict scrutiny in reviewing the constitutionality of gun laws. With "shall-issue" having succeeded everywhere it's likely to, and some places where it wasn't likely, this may be the next wave.

UPDATE: yes, the standards of review are purely court-created, and in fact some Justices have refused to employ them. That and they have varied from time to time -- when I was going to school, there were only two, strict scrutiny and rational basis. Now there's intermediate. And courts still have the ability to play with them somewhat, but at least this minimizes how much wiggle room a court has.

· State legislation

4 Comments | Leave a comment

Eric | November 7, 2012 3:47 PM | Reply

Going entirely from admittedly memory and understanding, but aren't the judicial review standards of "strict scrutiny", "intermediate", "rational basis," and all that more or less made up out of the air by SCOTUS? If so, is Louisiana's amendment the first time they've had a direct constitutional basis?

Diomed | November 8, 2012 4:25 AM | Reply

So what's to keep the LA courts from re-defining "strict scrutiny" as something else (and presumably much, much weaker)?

Harold | November 8, 2012 5:31 AM | Reply

Diomed: because that would dynamite a bunch of previous decisions.

Also grounds for impeachment or electoral lost (I assume the latter applies in the state); these words of art have a very specific meaning, but if your judges are corrupt it doesn't matter what your Constitution says anyway, does it?

And bringing down the hammer on a judge can have a powerful effect: Virginia's final "and this time we mean it!" shall issue law was underlined by the legislature removing from office the judge who played political games with Oliver North's concealed carry permit (it's done by the judicial system in that state). The recalcitrant judges in Northern Virginia and the Virginia Beach area took the hint....

NotClauswitz | November 8, 2012 9:57 AM | Reply

Before the election I hoped for something like this in California, but now with the raw and unbridled Left Democrats in control of BOTH State houses and holding a super majority, there is little hope left either for fiscal, legal, or social sanity…

Leave a comment