None
ET
Legal Expert: Supreme Court’s Second Amendment Decisions Cause Confusion
['Benjamin Borghi', 'Root', '--Ppa-Color-Scheme', '--Ppa-Color-Scheme-Active', 'Sourceurl Multiple-Authors-Widget-Css-Inline-Css', '.Pp-Multiple-Authors-Boxes-Wrapper.Pp-Multiple-Authors-Layout-Boxed.Multiple-Authors-Target-Action .Pp-Author-Boxes-Avatar Img', 'Width', 'Important', 'Height', 'Border-Radius']
Davis Vanguard
Chemerinsky writes that lingering ambiguity, caused by the Supreme Court’s abandonment of its traditional constitutional analysis, has left lower courts uncertain about how to apply gun laws.
The next significant Second Amendment ruling came in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen in 2022.
The consequences, Chemerinsky writes, were immediate.
He adds that post-Bruen courts have issued conflicting rulings, underscoring persistent uncertainty in the application of Second Amendment law within the criminal justice system.
As a remedy, Chemerinsky urges courts to abandon the history-only test and instead treat the Second Amendment as they do other constitutional rights.