IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/publus/v33y2003i3p63-82.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Federalism and the Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms

Author

Listed:
  • Nelson Lund

Abstract

Until recently, the federal courts agreed that the Second Amendment protects the interest of states in maintaining their own militias. In United States v. Emerson, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit rejected this consensus, and held that the Constitution protects a right of private individuals to keep and bear arms. The fifth circuit's position is more plausible than the consensus view, and the arguments for treating the Second Amendment as a kind of federalism device are weak. A different set of federalism issues is raised by the prospect that the Supreme Court might adopt the fifth circuit's position, and then take the next step of applying the Second Amendment to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment. Finally, Emerson shows how certain technical legal doctrines that protect the dignity of he states can operate to strengthen the federal government's ability to undermine protections afforded by the Second Amendment. Copyright 2003, Oxford University Press.

Suggested Citation

  • Nelson Lund, 2003. "Federalism and the Constitutional Right to Keep and Bear Arms," Publius: The Journal of Federalism, CSF Associates Inc., vol. 33(3), pages 63-82, Summer.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:33:y:2003:i:3:p:63-82
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:publus:v:33:y:2003:i:3:p:63-82. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/publius .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.