ratzinger (ratzinger) wrote in supreme_court,


"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The right to bear arms is, in the USA, considered to be a fundamental right that is protected by the constitution and defended especially by conservatives. The National Rifle Association, which has the Second Amendment (minus the militia clause) engraved on its headquarters building in Washington, insists that the Amendment guarantees the right of individuals to possess and carry a wide variety of firearms and this question was dodged by the Supreme Court in U. S. vs. Miller (1939)

President Bush, being a conservative, has stated that Justice Scalia and Justice Thomas both being so called strict constructionism or orginalists is what he as a President favors.

The question being, bearing this in mind, – in what (if at all) way may the right the bear arms be infringed, considering the application of a originalist – textualist or orginalist – intentionalist method of interpreting the 2nd amendment?
  • Post a new comment


    default userpic
    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.