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.
College of Law
Northern Illinois University Law Review
"What the Hell[er]? The Fine Print Standard of Review Under Heller,"
Northern Illinois University Law Review: Vol. 29:
3, Article 7.
Jason Racine, Note, What the Hell[er]? The Fine Print Standard of Review Under Heller, 29 N. Ill. U. L. Rev. 605 (2009).