Ready, Aim, Fire? District of Columbia v. Heller and Communities of Color
By Michael B. de Leeuw, Dale E. Ho, Jennifer K. Kim, and Daniel S. Kotler
The Supreme Court’s recent decision in District of Columbia v. Heller held that a municipal ban on handguns is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, but left open the possibility of reasonable regulations on firearms. Given the outrageous levels of firearms-related violence in many urban areas—violence that disproportionately affects communities of color—the question of what constitutes a reasonable regulation should be an issue of major concern to civil rights activists and lawyers. This article evaluates Heller in light of these issues, and argues in favor of a general presumption that local legislatures are best situated to balance the costs and benefits of firearms regulations. Moving forward, municipalities should be afforded broad discretion in enacting such regulations, consistent with the Court’s decision in Heller.
Densely populated urban municipalities typically have the nation’s most restrictive firearms laws, largely as a response to the scourge of firearms-related violence in those communities. African Americans in particular represent a grossly disproportionate percentage of the victims of gun violence: in 2004 in the District of Columbia, for instance, all but two of the 137 firearms-related homicide victims were African Americans. Heller, however, will likely herald significant litigation challenging local firearms laws. We argue that if such litigation is successful, it could unnecessarily limit the discretion of urban municipalities to regulate public health and safety, to the detriment of communities of color. The second half of our article considers a contrary view—put forth by academics like Robert Cottrol and Raymond Diamond—that firearms restrictions do not serve the interests of African Americans. Cottrol and Diamond argue that, historically, firearms restrictions have been enacted with racially discriminatory intent, and furthermore, that the vigorous enforcement of firearms restrictions has racially disproportionate penal consequences rivaling the costs of firearms-related violence itself.
View Full ArticleRelated Posts
-
Race Across Borders: The U.S. and ICERD
Posted on Oct 29, 2010
-
Lessons Learned from Comparing the Application of Constitutional Law and Federal Anti-Discrimination Law to African-Americans in the U.S. and Dalits in India in the Context of Higher Education
Posted on Oct 29, 2010
-
Historic Injustice, Group Membership and Harm to Individuals: Defending Claims for Historic Justice from the Non-Identity Problem
Posted on Oct 29, 2010
-
Sex, Drugs, and . . . Race-to-Castrate: A Black Box Warning of Chemical Castration’s Potential Racial Side Effects
Posted on Oct 29, 2010
Tags
Share This
