Help with a DC v. Heller Research paper?

[Eightball]

So, for one of my classes (Constitutional History of the United States since 1877), I picked the court case of District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U. S. ___ (2008). In addition to looking at the case itself, I should probably be looking at a few additional sources detailing the ramifications of the decision, but I'm having problems finding anything--googling "DC v. Heller" gets about six million threads on firearms forums, or just leads me back to the text of the case itself. If anyone has any suggestions for helpful reading/sources for this case in this case (see what I did there? ), I would welcome any suggestions.

Thanks!

 

[PaladinX13]

If you want analysis then use something like HeinOnline to pull up papers... in your case, probably law journals/reviews will provide the most relevant materials (but there will be a lot of technical legal jargon, so search other publications too for materials in common English).

The decision, however, is too soon, in my opinion, to be doing a historical paper on. I think you'd be better off picking an earlier decision like Miller, discussing what people thought of it at the time, what they thought it meant, and then using Heller as a prophetic capstone (indicating how it either confirms or counters the predictions and continues or counters the trend).

This book is useful for a broader history:
http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/supreme.html

 

[ilbob]

The decision itself is very rich in explanation.

I don't think anyone knows what the ramifications of the case will end up being.

I suspect most of us here are hoping it will be pretty substantial.

Depending on what level of scrutiny is applied it might not mean very much.

The volokh conspiracy has a lot of good stuff about it.

http://volokh.com/

There is also a law review paper linked in there that is quite readable that is a good place to start.

http://www.law.ucla.edu/volokh/2am.pdf

I suspect other posters can point to good material as well.

After you read the decision itself, and the paper, you should have a pretty decent idea where this might be headed.

This is a good thing to read too. It goes over the Miller case. Its almost a textbook on why you do not want to try and make good constitutional law defending a criminal with no money.

http://www.law.nyu.edu/ecm_dlv3/gro...iberty/documents/documents/ecm_pro_060964.pdf

 

[Sebastian the Ibis]

(Constitutional History of the United States since 1877),

I'm assuming you in law school, looking for a law review note.

At that level I would look at SCOTUS granting cert on the privileges and immunities clause in addition to the due process clause in McDonald. This has the potential to undo a century and a half of Constitutional law, and would be Scalia's or Thomas's magnum opus of originalist interpretation. If you can write a good enough paper and can get it published quick enough you might even get a citation.

If you are looking for something a little less difficult look at David Kopel's papers. Most are linked on Volokh and available for downloand on SSRN. Nelson Lund at George Mason and David Kopel just published a rebuttal to J. Harvie Wilkinson's idiotic comparison of Heller to Roe. Koppel also has a paper of the bastardisation of the 2A in the 10th Cir., I believe. You could easily write a paper for a undergrad class following up on these.

If you have more specific questions PM me.

 

[mljdeckard]

I agree with ilbob. The decision itself is rich in quotes, history, and references to precedent.

 

[Librarian]

And for that matter, the amicus briefs are pretty interesting - see
http://dcguncase.com/blog/

 

[TargetTerror]

I'm in lawschool and have been writing a research paper on the impact of Heller to firearms licenses. First and foremost, the 2nd amendment needs to be incorporated against the states. McDonald v Chicago will deal with that. Without incorporation, any analysis only applies to DC and the federal government. McDonald is actually asking that the Slaughterhouse Cases/Cruikshank be overruled and all of the Bill of Rights be incorporated which has HUGE implications well beyond 2nd amendment jurisprudence. It will incorporate a right to jury trial in civil cases and the 3rd amendment (quartering of soldiers) among other things.

It will be in strict scrutiny per Heller, as Scalia specifically rejects any lesser form of scrutiny by virtue of the enumeration of the right. For strict scrutiny, the compelling gov't interest will always be satisfied for gun control by some form of "public safety," so the crux will always be whether a law is narrowly tailored enough.

As discussed here and elsewhere, the key will be deciding how much regulation is too much. Some issues likely to arise:

• Firearms licensing (my paper is on this actually). A case is being heard in MA by the SJC in November, Commonwealth v De Pina on this issue.
• consumer protection laws v fundamental right to own a product (firearm) - this I find fascinating and entirely novel, as no other product and the sale thereof is specifically protected and in strict scrutiny. MA and CA's "approved lists" fall into this category.
• Whether public carry (open or concealed) is protected under the 2nd amendment (kind of an offshoot of licensing)
• registration of firearms
• disqualifications (pending case Hayes goes to domestic restraining orders, but all statutory disqualifiers are now subject to strict scrutiny)

Feel free to PM me with any Qs.