Document Type
Article
Subject Area
Special Section
Abstract
The United States Supreme Court’s history of analyzing firearms restrictions has seemingly always led to ambiguities and confusion in lower courts. This was especially true after 2008, when the Court decided District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008). In the years following Heller, lower courts across the country applied different standards to determine the constitutionality of firearms restrictions. The Court granted certiorari in New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022) to establish the proper test for determining whether a firearm regulation is constitutional. This test is based on U.S. history and tradition rather than varying levels of judicial scrutiny. In the years following Bruen, courts across the country appear to be complying with the rule announced. The rule is not a “regulatory straightjacket,” and jurisdictions are still able to pass a multitude of firearms regulations under the Bruen rule.
DOI
10.59643/1942-9916.1518
Rights
Copyright © 2025 by the WYOMING LAW REVIEW unless otherwise noted. Except as otherwise provided, copies of any article may be made for classroom use, provided that: (1) Copies are distributed at or below cost; (2) The author and the journal are identified; (3) Proper notice of copyright is affixed to each copy, and (4) The WYOMING LAW REVIEW is notified of the use.
Recommended Citation
Partrick, Michael
(2025)
"Bruen: The Court's Announcement of the Historical Analogy Test and the Aftermath Thereof,"
Wyoming Law Review: Vol. 25:
No.
1, Article 2.
Available at:
https://scholarship.law.uwyo.edu/wlr/vol25/iss1/2
