生产异常值

IF 2 2区 社会学 Q1 LAW
Darrell A. H. Miller, Joseph Blocher
{"title":"生产异常值","authors":"Darrell A. H. Miller, Joseph Blocher","doi":"10.1086/725159","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Last term, the Supreme Court issued its first major Second Amendment decision in more than a decade, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. The case concerned a challenge to New York’s century-old “may-issue” regulation, which required applicants to show “proper cause” to receive a license to carry a concealed handgun in public. Petitioners described New York’s may-issue law as an outlier compared to forty-three other states with more relaxed “shall-issue” or permitless carry laws. At oral argument, Paul Clement, representing the petitioners, framed the case as a simple request: “[W]e’d like what they’re having.” In a 6-3 majority opinion striking down New York’s law, Justice Clarence Thomas embraced petitioners’ characterization of the regulation as a contemporary outlier—and went further, casting it as a historical outlier as well. New York and supporting amici had amassed a","PeriodicalId":46006,"journal":{"name":"Supreme Court Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Manufacturing Outliers\",\"authors\":\"Darrell A. H. Miller, Joseph Blocher\",\"doi\":\"10.1086/725159\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Last term, the Supreme Court issued its first major Second Amendment decision in more than a decade, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. The case concerned a challenge to New York’s century-old “may-issue” regulation, which required applicants to show “proper cause” to receive a license to carry a concealed handgun in public. Petitioners described New York’s may-issue law as an outlier compared to forty-three other states with more relaxed “shall-issue” or permitless carry laws. At oral argument, Paul Clement, representing the petitioners, framed the case as a simple request: “[W]e’d like what they’re having.” In a 6-3 majority opinion striking down New York’s law, Justice Clarence Thomas embraced petitioners’ characterization of the regulation as a contemporary outlier—and went further, casting it as a historical outlier as well. New York and supporting amici had amassed a\",\"PeriodicalId\":46006,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Supreme Court Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Supreme Court Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1086/725159\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Supreme Court Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1086/725159","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

上一届,最高法院发布了十多年来第一个重大的第二修正案裁决,即纽约州步枪和手枪协会,股份有限公司诉布鲁恩。该案件涉及对纽约有百年历史的“可能发布”法规的挑战,该法规要求申请人出示“正当理由”获得在公共场合携带隐蔽手枪的许可证。请愿者称,与其他43个“应发布”或无许可携带法更为宽松的州相比,纽约州的可发布法律是一个异类。在口头辩论中,代表请愿者的保罗·克莱门特(Paul Clement)将此案描述为一个简单的请求:“我们想要他们所拥有的。”大法官克拉伦斯·托马斯(Clarence Thomas)以6比3的多数票推翻了纽约的法律,接受了请愿者将该法规定性为当代异类的说法,并进一步将其定性为历史异类。纽约和支持他的朋友们已经积累了
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Manufacturing Outliers
Last term, the Supreme Court issued its first major Second Amendment decision in more than a decade, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen. The case concerned a challenge to New York’s century-old “may-issue” regulation, which required applicants to show “proper cause” to receive a license to carry a concealed handgun in public. Petitioners described New York’s may-issue law as an outlier compared to forty-three other states with more relaxed “shall-issue” or permitless carry laws. At oral argument, Paul Clement, representing the petitioners, framed the case as a simple request: “[W]e’d like what they’re having.” In a 6-3 majority opinion striking down New York’s law, Justice Clarence Thomas embraced petitioners’ characterization of the regulation as a contemporary outlier—and went further, casting it as a historical outlier as well. New York and supporting amici had amassed a
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.80
自引率
5.00%
发文量
13
期刊介绍: Since it first appeared in 1960, the Supreme Court Review has won acclaim for providing a sustained and authoritative survey of the implications of the Court"s most significant decisions. SCR is an in-depth annual critique of the Supreme Court and its work, keeping up on the forefront of the origins, reforms, and interpretations of American law. SCR is written by and for legal academics, judges, political scientists, journalists, historians, economists, policy planners, and sociologists.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信