The History of Heller
The May 2009 American Spectator reviews my new book Gun Control on Trial, on the history of the precedent-setting 2008 Supreme Court case that revived the Second Amendment, D.C. v. Heller. An excerpt:
The outcome of Heller is much like the circumstances surrounding it: confusing and complex, with more questions than answers. That point is driven home in Brian Doherty's fine new book, Gun Control on Trial: Inside the Supreme Court Battle over the Second Amendment. In addition to examining the history of Heller, Doherty, a senior editor for Reason magazine, examines the history of gun rights before the Second Amendment, how anti-gun legal scholars twisted the original meaning of the Second Amendment and how more recent scholarship has revived it, the ineffectiveness of gun-control laws, and the cultural divide between Second Amendment supporters and opponents.
My book was excerpted in Reason magazine's December 2008 issue. Yesterday, I wrote about the positive aftermath of Heller in the courts so far.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Gun Control on Trial: Inside the Supreme Court Battle over the Second Amendment
Brian actually knows people inside the Supreme Court? AWESOME!
What are the insider picks in the cafeteria?
Glad the Heller case went the way it did, unless there is some sneaky lawyer stuff in there making it all meaningless.