Journal Article•
The Embarrassing Second Amendment
01 Jan 1990-Journal on firearms and public policy (Second Amendment Foundation)-Vol. 3, Iss: 1, pp 1-27
TL;DR: One of the best known pieces of American popular art in this century is the New Yorker cover by Saul Steinberg presenting a map of the United States as seen by a New Yorker, and to continue the map analogy, consider in this context the Bill of Rights.
Abstract: For too long, most members of the legal academy have treated the Second Amendment as the equivalent of an embarrassing relative, whose mention brings a quick change of subject to other, more respectable, family members. That will no longer do. It is time for the Second Amendment to enter full scale into the consciousness of the legal academy. Adapted from the authors essay in the from the Yale Law Journal, Volume 99, pp. 637-659.
Citations
More filters
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
Cites background from "The Embarrassing Second Amendment"
...American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1986) 8 21 0 29 Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989) 47 33 0 80 Hodgson v. Minnesota (1990) 6 11 0 17 Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health (1990) 10 3 0 13 Planned Parenthood v....
[...]
...American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1986) 8 21 0 29 Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989) 47 33 0 80 Hodgson v. Minnesota (1990) 6 11 0 17 Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health (1990) 10 3 0 13 Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) 9 20 0 29 Stenberg v. Carhart (2000) 23 11 1 35 Gonzales v....
[...]
...American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1986) 8 21 0 29 Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989) 47 33 0 80 Hodgson v. Minnesota (1990) 6 11 0 17 Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health (1990) 10 3 0 13 Planned Parenthood v. Casey (1992) 9 20 0 29 Stenberg v. Carhart (2000) 23 11 1 35 Gonzales v. Carhart (2007) 30 8 1 40...
[...]
...American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1986) 8 21 0 29 Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989) 47 33 0 80 Hodgson v. Minnesota (1990) 6 11 0 17 Ohio v....
[...]
...American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (1986) 8 21 0 29 Webster v. Reproductive Health Services (1989) 47 33 0 80 Hodgson v....
[...]
Journal Article•
TL;DR: Many of the issues surrounding the Second Amendment debate are raised in particularly sharp relief from the perspective of African-American history as mentioned in this paper, particularly those concerning self-defense, crime, participation in the security of the community, and the wisdom or utility of relying exclusively on the state for protection.
Abstract: Many of the issues surrounding the Second Amendment debate are raised in particularly sharp relief from the perspective of African-American history. With the exception of Native Americans, no people in American history have been more influenced by violence than blacks. Private and public violence maintained slavery. The nation's most destructive conflict ended the "peculiar institution." That all too brief experiment in racial egalitarianism, Reconstruction, was ended by private violence and abetted by Supreme Court sanction Jim Crow was sustained by private violence, often with public assistance. If today the memories of past interracial violence are beginning to fade, they are being quickly replaced by the frightening phenomenon of black-on-black violence, making life all too precarious for poor blacks in inner city neighborhoods. Questions raised by the Second Amendment, particularly those concerning self-defense, crime, participation in the security of the community, and the wisdom or utility of relying exclusively on the state for protection, thus take on a peculiar urgency in light of the modern Afro-American experience.
55 citations
Posted Content•
TL;DR: This article developed an interpretive-structural theory that harmonizes these seemingly opposed views of the Supreme Court decision-making, which not only explains why the internal and external views often are both effective but also why, sometimes, one approach might be more effective than the other.
Abstract: Law professors and political scientists generally subscribe to opposed theories of Supreme Court decision making. Law professors, to a great degree, adhere to an internal view: Supreme Court justices decide cases according to legal rules, principles, and precedents. Political scientists follow an external view: justices decide cases according to their political ideologies or preferences. This Article develops an interpretive-structural theory that harmonizes these seemingly opposed views. This interpretive-structural theory not only explains why the internal and external views often are both effective but also why, sometimes, one approach might be more effective than the other. The Article concludes by comparing the interpretive-structural theory with the “new institutionalism” that is emerging in political science.
34 citations
Cites background from "The Embarrassing Second Amendment"
...Thus, although there very well might be a best answer to the ultimate question regarding the meaning of the Second Amendment, scholars could debate the issue indefinitely....
[...]
...Does the Second Amendment create a collective right to possess guns within a government militia!...
[...]
...If, however, the Court were to do so, the Court would then be thrust into the interpretive debate over the Second Amendment.17 And while there is no method for finally settling the interpretive disagreement, there is a mechanical process within the institutional structure of the national government for determinately resolving an adjudicative dispute in the Supreme Court....
[...]
...Do the framers’ intentions matter today in understanding the Second Amendment?...
[...]
...Does the Second Amendment protect a right to possess guns only for the purpose of insurrection against a tyrannical government?...
[...]
Book•
29 Apr 2009TL;DR: Horwitz and Anderson as discussed by the authors reveal that the proponents of this view base their argument on a deliberate misreading of history and expose Insurrectionism - not government oppression - as the true threat to freedom in the U.S. today.
Abstract: The NRA steadfastly maintains that the 30,000 gun-related deaths and 300,000 assaults with firearms in the United States every year are a small price to pay to guarantee freedom. As former NRA President Charlton Heston put it, 'freedom isn't free'.And when gun enthusiasts talk about Constitutional liberties guaranteed by the Second Amendment, they are referring to freedom in a general sense, but they also have something more specific in mind - freedom from government oppression. They argue that the only way to keep federal authority in check is to arm individual citizens who can, if necessary, defend themselves from an aggressive government.In the past decade, this view of the proper relationship between government and individual rights and the insistence on a role for private violence in a democracy has been co-opted by the conservative movement. As a result, it has spread beyond extreme 'militia' groups to influence state and national policy.In "Guns, Democracy, and the Insurrectionist Idea", Josh Horwitz and Casey Anderson reveal that the proponents of this view base their argument on a deliberate misreading of history. The Insurrectionist myth has been forged by twisting the facts of the American Revolution and the founding of the United States, the denial of civil rights to African-Americans after the Civil War, and the rise of the Third Reich under Adolf Hitler. Here, Horwitz and Anderson set the record straight. Then, challenging the proposition that more guns equal more freedom, they expose Insurrectionism - not government oppression - as the true threat to freedom in the U.S. today.
33 citations
Book•
27 Feb 2012TL;DR: A Normative and Pedagogical Framework for Military History Examined: as discussed by the authors examines the educational influence of student-soldiers in their own words and the consequences of military presence for non-military students.
Abstract: Part I. A Normative and Pedagogical Framework: 1. The closing of the university mind: the military/university gap and the problem of civic and liberal education 2. Education in the regime: how a military presence can enhance civic and liberal education Part II. ROTC and the University: 3. ROTC and the university: an introduction 4. ROTC and the Ivies: before the storm 5. ROTC and the Ivies: the divorce 6. ROTC, Columbia, and the Ivy League: Sisyphus renews his quest to renew a troubled relationship 7. Post-DADT: Sisyphus nears the top of the mountain 8. Pedagogy and military presence: the educational influence of student-soldiers in their own words 9. Winning hearts and minds?: The consequences of military presence for non-military students Part III. Military History Examined: 10. Military history: an endangered or protected species? 11. Half empty or half full?: Military historians' perspectives on the status of military history and the leading departments 12. Military presence in security studies: political realism (re)considered 13. Security studies in the wake of the Cold War university: paragons of productive fiction, or throwing the baby out with the bathwater? Part IV. Concluding Thoughts: 14. Conclusion: placing the military in the university.
31 citations