Document Type
Article
Media Type
Text
Abstract
This casenote introduces the reader to District of Columbia v. Heller, in which the United States Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right, unconnected to militia duty, to keep and bear arms, thus finally answering the interpretive question of what the meaning of the Second Amendment truly is. After providing a thorough discussion of the majority's opinion, an analysis of both the historical nature and limited scope of Heller is provided. Next, the note argues that a workable analytical framework can be extracted from the Court's opinion by examining the fine print within the language and reasoning. Specifically, it will be asserted that from the Court's language and reasoning, a workable three-step test can be extracted: first, asking whether a Second Amendment challenge is being brought by an individual afforded constitutional protection; second, asking whether the challenge involves a weapon afforded constitutional protection; and third, evaluating the challenged law under a locality scheme called the HPS Test. Finally, the note will implement the proposed three-step test to conceal carry and licensing laws, which were two issues the Court did not fully address in Heller.
First Page
605
Last Page
643
Publication Date
7-1-2009
Department
College of Law
ISSN
0734-1490
Language
eng
Publisher
Northern Illinois University Law Review
Recommended Citation
Racine, Jason
(2009)
"What the Hell[er]? The Fine Print Standard of Review Under Heller,"
Northern Illinois University Law Review: Vol. 29:
Iss.
3, Article 7.
Suggested Citation
Jason Racine, Note, What the Hell[er]? The Fine Print Standard of Review Under Heller, 29 N. Ill. U. L. Rev. 605 (2009).
