« Will there be retroactive sentencing justice for drug defendants in New York? | Main | Death penalty news and notes »

March 29, 2009

Noting the Second Amendment dogs that did not bark in Hayes

Now available via SSRN is this effective little piece of student scholarship commenting on the Supreme Court's work last month in US v. Hayes upholding a gun possession conviction for a misdemeanant.  The piece is is titled "To Heller and Back: Why Many Second Amendment Questions Remain Unanswered After United States v. Hayes," and here is the abstract:

In District of Columbia v. Heller, the U.S. Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess firearms.  More recently, in United States v. Hayes, the Supreme Court upheld a federal statute which criminalizes the possession of firearms by persons previously convicted of misdemeanor domestic violence offenses.  This essay argues that the Hayes decision cannot be squared with the individual right to keep and bear arms enunciated in Heller.

Some related Second Amendment posts:

March 29, 2009 at 11:56 AM | Permalink


TrackBack URL for this entry:

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Noting the Second Amendment dogs that did not bark in Hayes:


Post a comment

In the body of your email, please indicate if you are a professor, student, prosecutor, defense attorney, etc. so I can gain a sense of who is reading my blog. Thank you, DAB