scispace - formally typeset
Search or ask a question
Author

Nicholas J. Johnson

Bio: Nicholas J. Johnson is an academic researcher from Fordham University. The author has contributed to research in topics: Bill of rights & Supreme court. The author has an hindex of 4, co-authored 15 publications receiving 77 citations.

Papers
More filters
Journal Article
TL;DR: Johnson as mentioned in this paper was the first to acknowledge the comments and helpful criticisms of David Caplan, Professor Robert Cottrol, Professor Raymond Diamond, Robert Dowlut and Don Kates.
Abstract: Professor of Legal Studies in Business and Taxation, Franklin and Marshall College. Of Counsel, Kirkpatrick and Lockhart. J.D. 1984, Harvard Law School, B.S.B.A. 1981, Magna Cum Laude, West Virginia University. I would like to acknowledge the comments and helpful criticisms of David Caplan, Professor Robert Cottrol, Professor Raymond Diamond, Robert Dowlut and Don Kates. All the views expressed are my own and are in no way attributable to or endorsed by the organizations with which I am affiliated. © 1992, Nicholas J. Johnson [Copyright © 1992 Nicholas J. Johnson. Originally published as 24 RUTGERS L.J. 1-81 (1992). Permission for WWW use at this site generously granted by the author. For educational use only. The printed edition remains canonical. For citational use please obtain a back issue from William S. Hein & Co., 1285 Main Street, Buffalo, New York 14209; 716-882-2600 or 800-828-7571.]

15 citations

Posted Content
TL;DR: The authors explores the parallels between the right of armed self-defense and the woman's right to abortion and demonstrates that the theories and principles advanced to support the abortion right intersect substantially with an individual's right of self-defence.
Abstract: In this article, Professor Nicholas J. Johnson explores the parallels between the right of armed self-defense and the woman's right to abortion. Professor Johnson demonstrates that the theories and principles advanced to support the abortion right intersect substantially with an individual's right to armed self-defense. Professor Johnson uncovers common ground between the gun and abortion rights - two rights that have come to symbolize society's deepest social and cultural divisions - divisions that prompt many to embrace the abortion right while summarily rejecting the gun right. Unreflective disparagement of the gun right, he argues, threatens the vitality of the abortion choice theories with which gun-rights arguments intersect and suggests that society's most difficult questions are settled not on principle, but by people's passions.

11 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: The history of the modern civil rights movement was one of defiance and fighting long before news cameras showed them attacked by dogs and fire hoses as mentioned in this paper, and the basic idea that the community would support indeed exalt the man or woman who fought back in self-defense, even with, nay, especially with arms, has a far longer pedigree than the modern orthodoxy which urges stringent supply controls as the clearly best firearms policy for black folk.
Abstract: The heroes of the modern civil rights movement were more than just stoic victims of racist violence. Their history was one of defiance and fighting long before news cameras showed them attacked by dogs and fire hoses. When Fannie Lou Hamer revealed she kept a shotgun in every corner of her bedroom, she was channeling a century old practice. And when delta share cropper Hartman Turnbow, after a shootout with the Klan, said \" I don't figure I was being non-nonviolent, (yes non-nonviolent) I was just protecting my family \" , he was invoking an evolved tradition that embraced self-defense and disdained political violence. The precise boundaries and policy implications of that tradition had always been debated as times and context changed. But the basic idea that the community would support indeed exalt the man or woman who fought back in self-defense, even with, nay, especially with arms, has a far longer pedigree than the modern orthodoxy which urges stringent supply controls as the clearly best firearms policy for black folk. Full consideration of this black tradition of arms raises serious questions about the practical wisdom and conceptual grounding of that modern orthodoxy.

6 citations

Journal Article
TL;DR: In this paper, a broad range of circumstances, the drawing, pointing, and firing of guns by men and women in uniform as lawful, even if sometimes regrettable, acts is validated.
Abstract: I INTRODUCTION We take lawful gun carriers for granted--at least some of them. We are acclimated to armed men and women in uniforms. We accept that those people are charged with enforcing rules that our society has agreed on, including the possibility that state agents might use guns to enforce those rules. In a broad range of circumstances, we validate the drawing, pointing, and firing of guns by men and women in uniform as lawful, even if sometimes regrettable, acts. A second category of lawful gun carriers is more controversial. It consists of private citizens authorized by a spectrum of state laws to carry guns in public. This class of lawful gun carriers has long been with us, but has garnered increased attention in recent years as the private gun-carry movement has burgeoned and courts have struck down restrictive laws in a handful of holdout jurisdictions. As private gun carriers and state laws facilitating them proliferated, skeptics offered dire warnings about the consequences. Fortunately, that parade of horribles did not materialize. Indeed, the debate about private gun carriers has centered on contested claims that the increase in private gun carriers has caused a decline in crime--the "more guns, less crime" thesis. (1) That thesis is contestable because it extrapolates from readily measurable things like the number of private gun carriers to the tougher to prove claim that private gun carriers are the principle cause of observed declines in violent crime. One consequence of the heated debate over whether armed "good guys" are deterring criminals is that it obscures important insights from the uncontested data about lawful private gun carriers--for example, not whether they deter crime, but simply how they behave with guns. This article focuses on that behavior and those insights. Unlike the claim that private gun carriers deter crime, the basic data about the behavior of private gun carriers (like the rate at which private gun carriers themselves are arrested for gun crime) is uncontroversial. That basic data has significant policy implications, especially when we compare the two classes of lawful gun carriers--that is, private carriers and police. One of the most significant things about the spread of the private carry movement is that laws allowing millions of ordinary Americans to carry guns did not turn them into robbers and murderers. This result undercuts the predictions of carnage that were based on the theory that the simple presence of a firearm would transform parking lot bumps into shootouts. And it also raises a question: if the simple presence of a gun does not drive the behavior of lawful gun carriers, what does? The answer to that question is "license." License here means the formal and informal rules, permissions, customs, and incentives that guide and constrain behavior. For private gun carriers this license is defined by the boundaries of the traditional self-defense claim--a narrow excuse for using deadly force where an innocent faces imminent threat of death or serious bodily harm. The license claim becomes stronger and yields additional insights when we integrate an analysis of the governing license and behavior of police, our other class of lawful gun carriers, who by rule and by custom operate under a relatively broad license to draw, point, and fire guns. This article claims that license best explains the behavior of all lawful gun carriers, both police and private citizens. And that assertion has several policy implications. License explains the generally hyper-law-abiding nature of lawful private gun carriers (who have lower arrest rates than the general population and, on crucial measures, lower arrest rates than the police). Also, comparing the narrow license that governs private citizens with the relatively broad license that governs police provides a better understanding of controversial police shootings as well as a sharper perspective on police escalation of violence. …

5 citations


Cited by
More filters
01 Jan 2014
TL;DR: In this paper, Cardozo et al. proposed a model for conflict resolution in the context of bankruptcy resolution, which is based on the work of the Cardozo Institute of Conflict Resolution.
Abstract: American Bankruptcy Institute Law Review 17 Am. Bankr. Inst. L. Rev., No. 1, Spring, 2009. Boston College Law Review 50 B.C. L. Rev., No. 3, May, 2009. Boston University Public Interest Law Journal 18 B.U. Pub. Int. L.J., No. 2, Spring, 2009. Cardozo Journal of Conflict Resolution 10 Cardozo J. Conflict Resol., No. 2, Spring, 2009. Cardozo Public Law, Policy, & Ethics Journal 7 Cardozo Pub. L. Pol’y & Ethics J., No. 3, Summer, 2009. Chicago Journal of International Law 10 Chi. J. Int’l L., No. 1, Summer, 2009. Colorado Journal of International Environmental Law and Policy 20 Colo. J. Int’l Envtl. L. & Pol’y, No. 2, Winter, 2009. Columbia Journal of Law & the Arts 32 Colum. J.L. & Arts, No. 3, Spring, 2009. Connecticut Public Interest Law Journal 8 Conn. Pub. Int. L.J., No. 2, Spring-Summer, 2009. Cornell Journal of Law and Public Policy 18 Cornell J.L. & Pub. Pol’y, No. 1, Fall, 2008. Cornell Law Review 94 Cornell L. Rev., No. 5, July, 2009. Creighton Law Review 42 Creighton L. Rev., No. 3, April, 2009. Criminal Law Forum 20 Crim. L. Forum, Nos. 2-3, Pp. 173-394, 2009. Delaware Journal of Corporate Law 34 Del. J. Corp. L., No. 2, Pp. 433-754, 2009. Environmental Law Reporter News & Analysis 39 Envtl. L. Rep. News & Analysis, No. 7, July, 2009. European Journal of International Law 20 Eur. J. Int’l L., No. 2, April, 2009. Family Law Quarterly 43 Fam. L.Q., No. 1, Spring, 2009. Georgetown Journal of International Law 40 Geo. J. Int’l L., No. 3, Spring, 2009. Georgetown Journal of Legal Ethics 22 Geo. J. Legal Ethics, No. 2, Spring, 2009. Golden Gate University Law Review 39 Golden Gate U. L. Rev., No. 2, Winter, 2009. Harvard Environmental Law Review 33 Harv. Envtl. L. Rev., No. 2, Pp. 297-608, 2009. International Review of Law and Economics 29 Int’l Rev. L. & Econ., No. 1, March, 2009. Journal of Environmental Law and Litigation 24 J. Envtl. L. & Litig., No. 1, Pp. 1-201, 2009. Journal of Legislation 34 J. Legis., No. 1, Pp. 1-98, 2008. Journal of Technology Law & Policy 14 J. Tech. L. & Pol’y, No. 1, June, 2009. Labor Lawyer 24 Lab. Law., No. 3, Winter/Spring, 2009. Michigan Journal of International Law 30 Mich. J. Int’l L., No. 3, Spring, 2009. New Criminal Law Review 12 New Crim. L. Rev., No. 2, Spring, 2009. Northern Kentucky Law Review 36 N. Ky. L. Rev., No. 4, Pp. 445-654, 2009. Ohio Northern University Law Review 35 Ohio N.U. L. Rev., No. 2, Pp. 445-886, 2009. Pace Law Review 29 Pace L. Rev., No. 3, Spring, 2009. Quinnipiac Health Law Journal 12 Quinnipiac Health L.J., No. 2, Pp. 209-332, 2008-2009. Real Property, Trust and Estate Law Journal 44 Real Prop. Tr. & Est. L.J., No. 1, Spring, 2009. Rutgers Race and the Law Review 10 Rutgers Race & L. Rev., No. 2, Pp. 441-629, 2009. San Diego Law Review 46 San Diego L. Rev., No. 2, Spring, 2009. Seton Hall Law Review 39 Seton Hall L. Rev., No. 3, Pp. 725-1102, 2009. Southern California Interdisciplinary Law Journal 18 S. Cal. Interdisc. L.J., No. 3, Spring, 2009. Stanford Environmental Law Journal 28 Stan. Envtl. L.J., No. 3, July, 2009. Tulsa Law Review 44 Tulsa L. Rev., No. 2, Winter, 2008. UMKC Law Review 77 UMKC L. Rev., No. 4, Summer, 2009. Washburn Law Journal 48 Washburn L.J., No. 3, Spring, 2009. Washington University Global Studies Law Review 8 Wash. U. Global Stud. L. Rev., No. 3, Pp.451-617, 2009. Washington University Journal of Law & Policy 29 Wash. U. J.L. & Pol’y, Pp. 1-401, 2009. Washington University Law Review 86 Wash. U. L. Rev., No. 6, Pp. 1273-1521, 2009. William Mitchell Law Review 35 Wm. Mitchell L. Rev., No. 4, Pp. 1235-1609, 2009. Yale Journal of International Law 34 Yale J. Int’l L., No. 2, Summer, 2009. Yale Journal on Regulation 26 Yale J. on Reg., No. 2, Summer, 2009.

1,336 citations

Book
01 Jan 1989
TL;DR: The history of the House of Representatives is surveyed and its structure, current function, and influence on American society are described.
Abstract: Surveys the history of the House of Representatives and describes its structure, current function, and influence on American society.

272 citations

Book
28 Jun 2018
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors recover the story of how African American activists remade national belonging through battles in legislatures, conventions, and courthouses, and show how the Fourteenth Amendment constitutionalized the birthright principle, and black Americans' aspirations were realized.
Abstract: Before the Civil War, colonization schemes and black laws threatened to deport former slaves born in the United States. Birthright Citizens recovers the story of how African American activists remade national belonging through battles in legislatures, conventions, and courthouses. They faced formidable opposition, most notoriously from the US Supreme Court decision in Dred Scott. Still, Martha S. Jones explains, no single case defined their status. Former slaves studied law, secured allies, and conducted themselves like citizens, establishing their status through local, everyday claims. All along they argued that birth guaranteed their rights. With fresh archival sources and an ambitious reframing of constitutional law-making before the Civil War, Jones shows how the Fourteenth Amendment constitutionalized the birthright principle, and black Americans' aspirations were realized. Birthright Citizens tells how African American activists radically transformed the terms of citizenship for all Americans.

68 citations

Dissertation
31 Mar 2017
TL;DR: Criminalizing Space: Ideological and Institutional Productions of Race, Gender, and State-sanctioned Violence in Houston, 1948-1967 as mentioned in this paper, is a seminal work.
Abstract: Criminalizing Space: Ideological and Institutional Productions of Race, Gender, and State-sanctioned Violence in Houston, 1948-1967

66 citations

DissertationDOI
01 Jan 2015
TL;DR: Spivey as discussed by the authors analyzes the nature and scope of battles over culture war issues in the United Supreme Court and concludes that there is not one culture war but rather an interrelated set of cultural battles.
Abstract: Title of Dissertation: CULTURE WARRIORS GO TO COURT: THE SUPREME COURT AND THE BATTLE FOR THE “SOUL” OF AMERICA Michael Odell Spivey, Doctor of Philosophy, 2015 Dissertation Directed by: Professor Wayne McIntosh Department of Government and Politics The notion of a “culture war” has become a fixture in the academic writing about current American politics, in the popular press and in the cultural zeitgeist. Theorists have suggested that there is a cultural fault line dividing cultural progressives and religious traditionalists. This fault line, it is argued, stems from a basic epistemological disagreement as to whether there is transcendent “truth.” According to James Davidson Hunter, these different worldviews lead to policy polarization and cultural warfare. Hunter goes on to suggest that courts (and especially the Supreme Court) are focal points for this conflict. This work analyzes the nature and scope of battles over culture war issues in the United Supreme Court. It relies on a popular description of key culture war issues: God, guns and gays. The Supreme Court’s treatment of each of these issues is analyzed in turn. In addition, the Supreme Court’s abortion jurisprudence is also examined. With respect to each issue, key Supreme Court cases are identified. The briefs filed by the parties are then summarized and coded, identifying key “modalities” of arguments and specific arguments themselves. All amicus briefs are similarly analyzed and coded. The key Supreme Court decisions are then analyzed in light of arguments raised by parties and amici. Based upon this analysis, it appears that there is not one culture war but rather an interrelated set of cultural battles. Relatedly, there has been an evolution of cultural warfare over time. Some issues have become largely settled (at least within the Court’s jurisprudence); others are on their way to being settled and still others present continuing opportunities for cultural clashes. The work concludes by suggesting that the sexual revolution lies at the heart of cultural warfare. Moreover, cultural battles are over the “meaning” of America, that is, what social values will be protected under law. CULTURE WARRIORS GO TO COURT: THE SUPREME COURT AND THE BATTLE FOR THE “SOUL” OF AMERICA by Michael Odell Spivey Dissertation submitted to the Faculty of the Graduate School of the University of Maryland, College Park in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy 2015 Advisory Committee: Professor Wayne McIntosh, Chair Professor Karen Kaufmann Professor Frances Lee Professor Irwin Morris Professor Susan Dwyer ©Copyright by Michael Odell Spivey 2015

60 citations