Publication Date
2011
Abstract
In June a splintered Supreme Court held in McDonald
v. City of Chicago that the Second Amendment applied to
state and local governments. But the case was about
much more than handguns. It presented the Court with
an unprecedented opportunity to correct its own erroneous
precedent and revive the Fourteenth Amendment's
Privileges or Immunities Clause. The plurality declined
the offer not, as Justice Alito's opinion suggested, out of a
profound respect for stare decisis, but rather because at
least four Justices like the consequences of that ancient
error, especially insofar as unenumerated rights are
concerned. This observation in turn raises questions
about interpretative method and the Court's fidelity to the
written Constitution.
Recommended Citation
Bryant, A. Christopher
(2011)
"What McDonald Means for Unenumerated Rights,"
Georgia Law Review: Vol. 45:
No.
4, Article 4.
Available at:
https://digitalcommons.law.uga.edu/glr/vol45/iss4/4