Brown, Epstein, and Gulati on The Constraining Efect of "History and Tradition": A Test

Rebecca L. Brown, USC School of Law, Lee Epstein, University of Southern California, and Mitu Gulati, University of Virginia School of Law, have published The Constraining Effect of "History and Tradition": A Test as Virginia Public Law and Legal Theory Research Paper No. 2024-63, Virginia Law and Economics Research Paper No. 2024-28, and USC Law Legal Studies Paper No. 24-33. Here is the abstract.

The U.S. Supreme Court’s embrace of originalism, and particularly the “history and tradition” method of interpreting constitutional text, is often justified by its defenders as constraining judges from making up the law to match their preferences. Two Second Amendment cases (Heller in 2008 and Bruen in 2022), where the Court switched methodologies, provide a vehicle to test the debated question. Analyzing data from federal court decisions on gun rights spanning 2000 to 2023, we find that the switch from a means-ends to a history-tradition methodology corresponds with an increase in judicial discretion. Personal factors like partisan identity, gender, race and careerist considerations shape judicial behavior in the post-Bruen era in ways they did not under the prior regime. The results challenge the notion that a historical approach provides a neutral constraint on judicial discretion.

Download the article from SSRN at the link.

Narrative, Constitutional Interpretation, and the Second Amendment

Ruthann Robson, CUNY School of Law, has published 27 Words at 13 MEMOIR: The Guns Issue 85 (2013). Here is the abstract.

The 27 words of the Second Amendment formed the basis of the United States Supreme Court's decision in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), in which the 5-4 majority relied upon a wealth of interpretations of an "individual right" that accelerated after the assassination of President JFK. This blend of intellectual and "popular" constitutionalism has continued after Heller, despite mass shootings with assault weapons, with continued support for a particular construction of the text of the Second Amendment. This piece interweaves constitutional histories, theories, cases, text, and scholarship of the Second Amendment with popular culture and personal narrative to query whether the interpretation of an individual right inherent in the "27 words" should continue to prevail.

Download the article from SSRN at the link.