This just in:
The landscape of the Second Amendment has radically shifted post-New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. Every day, courts are holding that various long-standing firearms restrictions are unconstitutional. Yet, while the judicial system generally attempts to follow Bruen, state legislatures rapidly enact new restrictions that seem to conflict with Bruen. The battle over the Second Amendment has only gotten more intense since Bruen. While some courts have strictly applied Bruen, many would argue that in its most recent Second Amendment case, United States v. Rahimi, the Supreme Court itself failed to strictly apply Bruen by relying on analogical reasoning instead of “distinctively similar” historical regulations to address a “persistent societal problem.” Justice Thomas, who authored Bruen, pointed out this error, and his dismay was apparent in his Rahimi dissent. Still, others argue that Rahimi was not entirely in conflict with Bruen, and interpreted that the Court held that people can only be temporarily disarmed.
The Dickinson Law Review seeks to clarify these murky waters in Volume 129’s Symposium issue. To do so, we seek authors who are well-versed in the subject matter and wish to offer their perspectives on the future of the Second Amendment in a post-Bruen world.
We seek to solicit papers delineating the meets and bounds of the Second Amendment post-Bruen. In that vein, we aim to solicit papers that clarify:
- What are “arms” under the Second Amendment?
- What is the purpose of the Second Amendment?
- Who are “the people” under the Second Amendment?
- What are “infringements” on the Second Amendment?
- What gun control measures can be enacted without running afoul of the Second Amendment?
- How does the Second Amendment interact with rights?
- What impact does the Second Amendment have on different groups based on their race, ethnicity, gender, sex, or sexual identity?
- What remedies are available to victims of gun violence without violating the Second Amendment protections?
- What remedies would discourage state and local governments from continuing to pass laws designed to contravene the Court’s Second Amendment Jurisprudence?
The Symposium is scheduled for April 4, 2025, at Penn State Dickinson Law’s Carlisle location. There is no conference fee, and Penn State Dickinson Law will provide speakers with some funding for travel and accommodations. We are seeking both authors and speakers to present at our symposium.
To apply, please submit a proposal to [email protected] by 11:59 P.M. on October 23rd, 2024. We seek both essays (12,000 to 15,000 words including footnotes) and articles (15,000 to 30,000 words including footnotes). In your proposal, please include your name, title, a short summary of your proposed topic, and a brief statement of your background and/or reason for interest in participating in our symposium. Additionally, please indicate if you intend to write an essay or article, if known, and if you would be willing to travel to our symposium to participate in person.
Please address any questions to our Executive Symposium Editor, James V. Scaglione at [email protected]. Any questions that would be more appropriately answered by the faculty or administration should be addressed to our Faculty Symposium Advisor, Associate Dean Shaakirrah R. Sanders at [email protected].
Recent Comments