Uncomfortable Timing for a Supreme Court Gun Fight

Uncomfortable Timing for a Supreme Court Gun Fight

Credit…Amélie Landry/Agence VU, via Redu​x Once again, the country is awash in gun violence. And once again, the justices have to decide whether to inject the Supreme Court into the middle of the gun debate. Will the first of those two sentences inform the second? That’s really the question now, it seems to me. There is little doubt that the necessary four votes exist to add a Second Amendment case to the docket for decision, and there are plenty of candidates to choose from. One case under active consideration challenges New York State’s restriction on carrying a concealed gun outside the home. The justices have taken it up at their private conference twice this month and are scheduled to do so again on Friday. A case from New Jersey raising the same challenge to a similar constraint was filed at the court on April 2. There are other Second Amendment cases in the pipeline, propelled toward the court in the expectation that Justice Amy Coney Barrett’s arrival has finally tipped the balance toward action on the gun rights agenda. Thinking about that prospect in light of the banner headline that ran across the front page of The Times on Saturday — “In Indianapolis, 3rd Massacre in 3 Months — brought to mind a lecture that William Rehnquist, 15 years into his Supreme Court tenure as an associate justice and on the eve of becoming chief justice, gave in 1986 at Suffolk University Law School in Boston. He later published […]

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.