The History and Politics of Second Amendment Scholarship: A Primer

The introductory Article to this Symposium reviews the history and politics of Second Amendment scholarship, beginning in 1960, when the first article endorsing the individual right model was published, challenging what had previously been the accepted view that the Second Amendment grants only a collective right to keep and bear arms within the government-organized militia. Bogus describes how gun rights organizations embarked on a bootstrap campaign to develop a large body of writing supporting the individual right model, much of it by lawyers directly employed by or representing gun rights organizations, and then argued that the sheer mass of this writing was significant. Bogus devotes most of this Article to critically assessing the work of the five most prominent scholars to endorse the individual right view: Sanford Levinson, Akhil Reed Amar, William Van Alstyne, Laurence H. Tribe, and Leonard W. Levy

War on the Common Law: The Struggle at the Center of Products Liability

Over its first two decades, products liability evolved from a system concerned only with manufacturing defects, e.g., MacPherson\u27s Buick into one concerned also with design defects, e.g., the Ford Pinto, which was designed in a fashion that made the gas tank susceptible to exploding in minor collisions. Part I of this Article deals with the two paradigms that lie at the center of the struggle. Part II of the Article is devoted to generic liability. Part III discusses important jurisprudential questions raised by the debate, namely: What are the respective roles of the courts, the legislature, and administrative agencies

Rescuing Burke

This Article has three objectives. The first is to demonstrate Burke\u27s liberalism. The second is to argue that Burke might also be considered a conservative, but a certain kind of conservative only, namely, a traditional conservative. Edmund Burke\u27s philosophy is at war with that of the dominant conservatives of today - libertarians, neoconservatives, and social conservatives 2 - even though these conservatives seek to associate their thinking with his. Thus, I seek to deny to these groups Burke\u27s good name. At the same time, I wish to show that Burke offers common ground to some liberals and conservatives. These groups have their differences, to be sure, but by recognizing how much they have in common with Edmund Burke they will discover they have much in common with each other. At a time of bitter partisanship, this will allow some liberals and conservatives to begin a potentially fruitful, dialogue. The third objective of this Article is to stimulate this dialogue