Il Secondo Emendamento e il diritto di portare armi da fuoco nei luoghi pubblici Commento a New York State Rifle & Pistols Assn. v. Bruen, con note minime sulle implicazioni sulla Firearms Tort Litigation negli Stati Uniti

Abstract

Abstract: In New York State Rifle & Pistols Assn. v. Bruen, the Supreme Court of the United States rendered a 6-3 decision whereby declared the unconstitutionality of New York’s proper cause requirement regulation for obtaining an unrestricted license to carry a concealed firearm. The majority opinion by Justice Clarence Thomas stated that New York law violates the Fourteenth Amendment in that it prevents law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. This paper aim is twofold. First, the author intends to provide an analysis of the Bruen decision in light of previous SCOTUS judgments on the Second Amendment. To do so, this paper stresses the significant shift occurred in firearms regulation due to Bruen. In detail, it focuses on the “conservative revolution” embedded in the majority opinion by Justice Thomas. After having identified the major characters of the emerging so-called conservative judicial activism, the analysis delves into the consequences that Bruen broad interpretation of the Second Amendment will have on U.S. legal system. One of them is the increasing involvement of tort law, and in particular tort litigation, in firearms regulation. That is the second aim of this paper: showing how the trend towards the privatization of social and political conflicts, already experienced in abortion and climate change, also regards firearms regulation.

Keywords: Comparative Law; Second Amendment; The Right to Keep and Bear Arms; Law Office History; Firearms Litigation.