Even when upholding gun regulations, American courts rarely, if ever, reference these counterbalancing constitutional values. Instead, regulation is presented in sterile, technocratic termsat best permissible, but never a constitutionally inspired imperative. How can courts do otherwise when they lack a narrative that locates these values at the heart of the constitutional debate over guns?
Constitutional narratives drawn from the contemporary world are, admittedly, a bit novel in todays legal arena. This is, in part, the result of a decades-long effort by right-leaning gun advocates, lawyers, and scholars to frame arguments that rely on anything but the Constitutions text and the original values recognized at the time of the founding as not constitutionally valid. Their interpretive methodologiesaptly named textualism and originalismdeny constitutional imprimatur to rights and interests that cannot be identified in the Constitutions plain text or found in narratives premised on the writings of long-dead men... Constitutional narratives that account for the world they engender and the way they balance competing rights offer an answer to his admonition, infusing constitutional debates with practical lessons drawn from reality.
Such narratives are not merely politically expedient. They have long been an integral component of our constitutional culture, shaping popular understanding of our Constitution and, in turn, judicial decisions that reflect this understanding. By connecting the Constitution to those whose lives it governs and the values that motivate them, constitutional narratives are a distinctively democratic form of argument.
Gun-control advocates must reclaim the Constitution from the pro-gun lobby. The March for Our Lives brief is a step toward building a constitutional architecture that makes room for these sidelined constitutional values, one that properly integrates law with reality. It recognizes the pain of those whose lives have been upended by the elevation of founding-era mythology above present-day tragedy. And by putting the gun violence permeating Americas streets and schools directly in front of the Supreme Court as it confronts a high-profile case, the brief ensures that this narrative will be heard.
2nd Amendment / Young Libtards bump for later...
And, in one sentence, accidentally admitting that gungrabbers have no Constitutional basis.