文章基本信息

标题：Changing the Constitutional Landscape for Firearms: The US Supreme Court's Recent Second Amendment Decisions
本地全文：下载
作者：Jon S. Vernick ; Lainie Rutkow ; Daniel W. Webster 等
期刊名称：American journal of public health
印刷版ISSN：0090-0036
出版年度：2004
卷号：101
期号：11
页码：2021-2026
DOI：10.2105/AJPH.2011.300200
语种：English
出版社：American Public Health Association
摘要：In 2 recent cases—with important implications for public health practitioners, courts, and researchers—the US Supreme Court changed the landscape for judging the constitutionality of firearm laws under the Constitution's Second Amendment. In District of Columbia v Heller (2008), the court determined for the first time that the Second Amendment grants individuals a personal right to possess handguns in their home. In McDonald v City of Chicago (2010), the court concluded that this right affects the powers of state and local governments. The court identified broad categories of gun laws—other than handgun bans—that remain presumptively valid but did not provide a standard to judge their constitutionality. We discuss ways that researchers can assist decision makers. HAVING GONE ALMOST 70 years without deciding a case directly addressing the US Constitution's Second Amendment “right to keep and bear arms,” beginning in 2008 the US Supreme Court decided 2 such cases with important implications for the public's health. In District of Columbia v Heller ¹ (decided June 26, 2008), the Supreme Court concluded for the first time that the Constitution grants individuals a personal right to possess handguns in their home for protection. In its decision, the court struck down a 1976 District of Columbia law that outlawed most handgun ownership. But the Heller decision left several important questions unanswered, particularly whether the Second Amendment affects state or local firearm laws or only limits the power of the federal government. In McDonald v City of Chicago ² (decided June 28, 2010), the Supreme Court determined that the Second Amendment does indeed apply to laws enacted by state and local governments. Nevertheless, the McDonald decision also leaves critical issues undecided, issues that lower courts must now address and that may affect the risk of firearm violence for millions of Americans. Firearms were associated with more than 240 000 deaths from 2000 to 2007, including homicides, suicides, and unintentional deaths. During that same period, more than 530 000 additional nonfatal firearm injuries were treated in hospital emergency departments.³ Laws at the federal, state, and local levels seek to address this public health burden.⁴ Evaluations of a number of these laws indicate public health and safety benefits; for other laws, the effects remain controversial.^{5 – 8} We briefly review the history of how the Supreme Court and lower federal courts initially interpreted the Second Amendment and examine how the Heller and McDonald decisions have changed that interpretation. We also discuss the implications for researchers, policymakers, and the courts.