GUNS AND TIMES: ORIGINALISM AND THE UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT DECISION IN NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION, INC. V. BRUEN, 597 U.S. ___ (2022)

The recent United States Supreme Court decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. ___ (2022), written by Justice Clarence Thomas, established that states enacting restrictions on the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms must now demonstrate that their restrictions are “consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation”. The notion that the Supreme Court should defer to historical sentiments and the perceived original intent of the framers of the Constitution is known as originalism and is becoming increasingly prevalent in the decisions of the Court. Originalism fails in that it requires U.S. Supreme Court justices to rely on biased amicus curiae briefs and an incomplete understanding of history when rendering their decisions. I will argue that Justice Thomas’s appeal to historical understandings in NYSRPA v. Bruen is not only a flawed theory of constitutional interpretation, but also historically inaccurate.