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

« My latest paper on the 2A | Main | RIP John Ross »

Thoughts on NYSRPA v. Bruen

Posted by David Hardy · 4 May 2022 10:10 AM

Supreme Court oral arguments are divided into "sessions" aka "sittings," each lasting two weeks and encompassing 10-12 arguments. The custom is that each Justice gets at least one opinion to write from each session. Usually, that's not difficult: yes, every Term will have two or so really controversial cases, and about 50-60 that are mundane. Odds are a Justice won't often be in the dissent on ten cases in a row.

If you plot out the cases of a session vs. who has already written an opinion from it, you can often get an idea of who is writing the opinion(s) yet to be decided.

NYSRPA was one of ten cases argued in the session beginning November 1. Of the ten cases, Gorsuch got two, and everyone else has gotten one except for Justices Thomas and Barrett. So the author will likely be one of those two. This is, of course, great news for the 2A, as the two are great stalwarts for original public understanding. As far as the reasoning to be used, Barrett is very supportive of "text, history, and tradition," and Thomas is inclined that way.

Most First Amendment cases employ balancing tests as a basis, with the test weighted by standard of review -- strict scrutiny, intermediate review, rational basis, and sometimes a few more. Assess the purported need against the right being protected. But for rights outside the 1A, "text, history and tradition" tend to prevail. Right to a jury trial, or against self-incrimination -- don't talk to us about what need there is for restricting them, discuss whether this measure fits in with their text, history and tradition. One might even say, "what part of 'shall not be infringed' do you not understand?" By that standard, with a little pushing, restrictions on concealed but not open carry might pass muster, and anything more restrictive than that is going to be very doubtful.

5 Comments | Leave a comment

Fyathyrio | May 4, 2022 10:47 AM | Reply

Thomas has been champing at the bit to get another crack at a 2A case it would seem, based on his comments in several dissents from cert denials over the years. Now we just need the opinion released before some nut assassinates one of the conservative judges over abortion.

Marcus Poulin | May 4, 2022 12:50 PM | Reply

Awesome Jurisprudential Analysis You Provide Mr. Hardy.

Fyooz | May 5, 2022 9:47 AM | Reply

"Thomas has been champing at the bit "

Surely he has been polishing a draft since MacDonald. Just as Alito appears to have done.

BillTheCat | May 5, 2022 4:42 PM | Reply

It's been speculated that in Dobbs, Roberts was not in the majority (because he would have kept the opinion-writing for himself to preserve Roe), so it fell to Thomas (next senior) to assign the opinion. Why wouldn't Thomas keep it for himself? He assigned to Alito so he (Thomas) could take care of the NYSRPA opinion.
Interesting idea, anyway.

Fyooz | May 7, 2022 7:56 PM | Reply

"Why wouldn't Thomas keep it for himself? He assigned to Alito so he (Thomas) could take care of the NYSRPA opinion."

I agree.

Leave a comment