Showing papers by "Joseph Blocher published in 2023"
TL;DR: In American law, the boundaries of regulation are set by politics and the Constitution as mentioned in this paper , and the line between these political and constitutional constraints is never entirely clear, as political rhetoric and constitutional doctrine borrow from one another in innumerable ways.
Abstract: InAmerican law, the boundaries of regulation are set by—among other things— politics and the Constitution. Either one can serve as a constraint. Regulations that are politically unpopular or otherwise unfeasible are non-starters regardless of whether they satisfy the Constitution. Regulations that violate the Constitution, on the other hand, may be tremendously popular but will often be struck down by courts. The line between these political and constitutional constraints is never entirely clear, as political rhetoric and constitutional doctrine borrow from one another in innumerable ways. Elected officials take oaths to uphold the Constitution; judges often act in ways that appear political. But in a broad sense, judges are more commonly associated with the enforcement of constitutional law and regularly deny that they are doing politics—a matter for elected officials. Recognizing some slippage between the categories, we can draw a line between judge-enforced constitutional law and democratic politics. Formost of American history, the balance of gun rights and regulationwas set by politics—not, as one might suspect from its prominence in the current gun debate, the Second Amendment. Decisions about gun law were made by elected officials at the federal, state, and local level, responding to different forms of political pressure.
3 citations
TL;DR: The case concerned a challenge to New York's century-old "may-issue" regulation, which required applicants to show "proper cause" to receive a license to carry a concealed handgun in public as discussed by the authors .
Abstract: Last term, the Supreme Court issued its first major Second Amendment decision in more than a decade, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. The case concerned a challenge to New York’s century-old “may-issue” regulation, which required applicants to show “proper cause” to receive a license to carry a concealed handgun in public. Petitioners described New York’s may-issue law as an outlier compared to forty-three other states with more relaxed “shall-issue” or permitless carry laws. At oral argument, Paul Clement, representing the petitioners, framed the case as a simple request: “[W]e’d like what they’re having.” In a 6-3 majority opinion striking down New York’s law, Justice Clarence Thomas embraced petitioners’ characterization of the regulation as a contemporary outlier—and went further, casting it as a historical outlier as well. New York and supporting amici had amassed a
TL;DR: In this paper , the authors highlight two recent trends in social science research that supplement the traditional focus on guns and physical harm: personal security, status, identity, and cultural markers being key reasons people offer for possessing firearms and broadening our understanding of the impact of guns on the public sphere beyond just physical safety.
Abstract: Academic work is increasingly important to court rulings on the Second Amendment and firearms law more generally. This article highlights two recent trends in social science research that supplement the traditional focus on guns and physical harm. The first strand of research focuses on the changing ways that gun owners connect with firearms, with personal security, status, identity, and cultural markers being key reasons people offer for possessing firearms. The second strand focuses on broadening our understanding of the impact of guns on the public sphere beyond just physical safety. This research surfaces the ways that guns can create fear, intimidation, and social trauma; deter civic participation and the exercise of constitutional rights; and further entrench racial inequality. Expected final online publication date for the Annual Review of Law and Social Science, Volume 19 is October 2023. Please see http://www.annualreviews.org/page/journal/pubdates for revised estimates.