McDonald v. Chicago: Which Standard of Scrutiny Should Apply to Gun-Control Laws?
In this debate, Professors Rosenthal and Malcolm debate the standard of scrutiny that the Supreme Court should apply to restrictions on the Second Amendment in the wake of its recent decision, McDonald v. City of Chicago. Professor Rosenthal begins Part I by noting the importance of gun-control laws...
| 1. VerfasserIn: | |
|---|---|
| Beteiligte: | |
| Medienart: | Elektronisch Buch |
| Sprache: | Englisch |
| Veröffentlicht: |
2010
|
| In: | Jahr: 2010 |
| Online-Zugang: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Verfügbarkeit prüfen: | HBZ Gateway |
| Zusammenfassung: | In this debate, Professors Rosenthal and Malcolm debate the standard of scrutiny that the Supreme Court should apply to restrictions on the Second Amendment in the wake of its recent decision, McDonald v. City of Chicago. Professor Rosenthal begins Part I by noting the importance of gun-control laws to police; he considers a lower standard of scrutiny necessary to allow law enforcement officials to protect the community. Turning to the practical consequences of Chicago and Washington, D.C.'s recent gun-control laws, which make owning a gun nearly impossible in those cities, Professor Malcolm argues for a standard of strict scrutiny for all gun-control laws in Part II. Finally, in Part III, Professor Rosenthal replies |
|---|