The Flaws of Bruen and the Principle of the Second Amendment

Authors

Cameron Collins

Abstract

With a six Justice majority, the Court is more conservative than it has been in ninety years. No time has been wasted as the conservative Justices take aim at legal precedents left over from a more progressive era on the Court. There being no prior test established by the highest Court to review legal challenges on Second Amendment grounds, the Court took the opportunity to write new precedent in New York State Rifle Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. Rather than stick with the means-end scrutiny framework that had been developing in the circuit courts, the Supreme Court established a new test based on history and tradition as a way of deciphering the original meaning and understanding of the Second Amendment’s text. In doing so, the test seeks to remove personal preference as a potential factor in judicial review. While this intent may seem honorable, this Comment will make the argument that such a goal cannot be achieved through a test of history and tradition. It will contemplate how existing frameworks of means-end scrutiny may be more useful in achieving that goal and look at the future implications on other forms of constitutional judicial review as a result of the Court’s ruling in Bruen.

Recommended Citation

Cameron Collins, The Flaws of Bruen and the Principle of the Second Amendment, 75 Cath. U. L. Rev. 304 (2025).
Available at: https://scholarship.law.edu/lawreview/vol75/iss2/8