Kevin Schascheck

The last fifteen years have revolutionized the application of the Second Amendment. The Amendment’s clunkily worded protections have been transformed from mere legal surplusage to a potent force as the U.S. Supreme Court has recognized an individual right to keep and bear arms, incorporated it against the states, and then turbo-charged its meaning with a novel historical test that has empowered constitutional challenges to established methods of regulating firearm possession. But even as all of this action takes place in federal court, states continue to ratify amendments to their own constitutions that strengthen their own citizens’ rights to keep and bear arms. A small but growing number of states have subjected these rights to strict scrutiny and added ancillary protections. Though opponents of these measures warned that many public safety measures could be imperiled, advocates claimed that their only purpose was to lock in existing gun rights—and so far, they have been right. These developments have not yet produced a switch in how gun-control measures are litigated. Most cases are still brought in federal court, and most state courts have opted away from a maximalist interpretation of these new state constitutional rights. Yet this could very well change in the near future. As the U.S. Supreme Court refines the historical test it introduced in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, the ultimate impact on modern-day gun control is unclear. If federal courts reject challenges to well-established and politically popular measures of gun control, it seems likely that states might soon be the center of more gun rights litigation. As this happens, litigants will likely be met by much more receptive judiciaries. Ostensibly nonpartisan judicial nominating procedures have been captured by partisan actors, and growing ideological polarization has produced state court judges who are more willing than ever to embrace extremist legal arguments. As a resu…

Now in the Arizona State Law Journal—"Ratifying Bruen in the States." I argue that, as states adopt explicit rights to bear arms in their constitutions and state judiciaries get more radical, we may see maximalist, Bruen-style interpretations in the states.
arizonastatelawjournal.org/wp-content/u...

It's important to note here that we're not just talking about faculty & university staff. 100s of U.S. colleges are in towns or small cities where they form the major industry & lifeblood of the community. Loss of students -> loss of rent $, restaurant $, bars, bookstores, gaming stores...

SCOTUS Gun Watch - Week of 8/4/25 | Duke Center for Firearms Law

SCOTUS Gun Watch - Week of 8/4/25 firearmslaw.duke.edu/2025/08/scot...

2!

1) We need more Second Amendment courses in law schools;
2) you can teach it with this casebook;
3) the casebook is fantastic, my students have raved about early versions for the past two years.
Congrats and big thanks to Joseph, Jake, Jody, and Darrell!

Ahhh our casebook is officially published & on the way!!! If you have any interest in teaching (or learning about!) the Second Amendment or firearms law, I hope you'll consider our casebook! Feel free to reach out with any questions about the book or the field!!

www.westacademic.com/Blocher-Char...

Please share: excellent history Postdoc opportunity at Wesleyan's Center for the Study of Guns & Society. Post involves archival research on 18th and 19th century firearms use & laws; work on databases, reports, and papers; & thinking and writing around wonderful people doing important work.

This raises an interesting question for law professors and political scientists: what is a law now? How do we distinguish *real* laws from “laws.” Does the Dual State idea help us? (So: a lawless world alongside a law-bound one.) Re-election prospects? Issue polling? You get the idea. (3/7)

USA v. Erik Harris, Docket No. 21-03031

NEW: The 3rd Cir (Bibas, J.) concludes that the 2nd Am doesn't invalidate the federal law barring unlawful drug users from having guns, so long as it's only applied to those who "pose a special danger of misusing firearms because they frequently use drugs."

www.documentcloud.org/documents/25...

What can recent gun litigation tell us about injunctive relief following the blockbuster Trump v. CASA decision? Read on for more today on the blog... firearmslaw.duke.edu/2025/07/inju...

Truly horrifying.

Reposting to read later

Similar to Alan, my parents adopted me from South Korea when I was a baby. I have no recollection of Seoul or my biological mother. I also do not know her name or have any details.

To echo: if birthright citizenship becomes a patchwork right, what’s someone like me to do?

Please tell me we are going to make “See (sorry)” happen.

SG Prelogar also teed up the constitutionality of universal injunctions when NDTX was enjoining Biden left and right, and SCOTUS passed.

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHHH

The Ambitions of History and Tradition—In and Beyond the Second Amendment | Duke Center for Firearms Law

The Ambitions of History and Tradition—In and Beyond the Second Amendment firearmslaw.duke.edu/2025/06/the-...

It comes in a tub. I’ll message it to you.

I use the creamy cetaphil moisturizer (not the thinner facial lotion) twice a day with tretinoin. How often are you using the tretinoin?

Marshall was very excited to hear about the Firearms WIP Conference

Smith & Wesson (PLCAA): Mexico loses

www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24p...

He’s so perfectly clumsy

Pretty big deal—the Supreme Court denies review of lower court cases rejecting Second Amendment challenges to Assault Weapon Bans. But Kavanaugh signals that SCOTUS review is coming “in a term or two.”

www.supremecourt.gov/orders/court...

The 10th Circuit this week upheld 922(g)(8)(C)(ii) - the subpart the Court did not reach in Rahimi - following the reasoning of other circuits that Rahimi does not “impose an explicit-written-finding requirement” that the subject poses a danger. US v. Gordon. 2025 WL 1462676.

This is a great post from @drustevenson.bsky.social for folks to read on gun rights restoration.

RALEIGH, N.C. (AP) - Republican challenger concedes a 2024 North Carolina Supreme Court election to the Democratic incumbent.

Riggs on track to win NC Supreme Court race Based on a court filing from the North Carolina State Board of Elections, Democratic Supreme Court Justice will defeat Republican Court of Appeals Judge Jefferson Griffin.

!!! The NC Board of Elections reveals that EVEN IF it throws out all the votes contested by Jefferson Griffin and the state Supreme Court, Justice Allison Riggs is STILL on track to narrowly win the race. HUGE news from @bryanranderson.bsky.social: andersonalerts.substack.com/p/riggs-supr...

A stuffed coyote in a bar.

Met this guy at the Democracy Works in Progress Conference. Thanks @yeargain.bsky.social for the opportunity.