Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Correcting your grammar- I'm assuming you meant '<i>is</i> virtually never used'?
Line 12: Line 12:  
:While others address the legal standard that should govern this Court's scrutiny of the statutes at issue, amici submit the following empirical information regarding the effect of firearms, and in particular handguns, on the public's health. See, e.g., ''Brown v. Bd. of Educ.'', 347 U.S. 483, 494 & n.11 (1952) (empirical evidence informs constitutional analysis).
 
:While others address the legal standard that should govern this Court's scrutiny of the statutes at issue, amici submit the following empirical information regarding the effect of firearms, and in particular handguns, on the public's health. See, e.g., ''Brown v. Bd. of Educ.'', 347 U.S. 483, 494 & n.11 (1952) (empirical evidence informs constitutional analysis).
   −
In fact, empirical evidence virtually never used to interpret a constitutional provision, and was not used for that purpose in ''Brown v. Bd. of Educ.''  (expand).  No credible theory of constitutional interpretation relies or utilizes empirical evidence.  Empirical evidence can be cited for ''amending'' or changing the Constitution, not reinterpreting it.  [[Judicial activism]] might rely on empirical evidence, but any method of interpretation that adheres to the text of the Constitution would not.
+
In fact, empirical evidence is virtually never used to interpret a constitutional provision, and was not used for that purpose in ''Brown v. Bd. of Educ.''  (expand).  No credible theory of constitutional interpretation relies or utilizes empirical evidence.  Empirical evidence can be cited for ''amending'' or changing the Constitution, not reinterpreting it.  [[Judicial activism]] might rely on empirical evidence, but any method of interpretation that adheres to the text of the Constitution would not.
    
The group cites ''[[Day v. State]]'' for the precedent that a state may place restrictions on the possession of bowie knives, but the [[Second Amendment]] does not protect a "right to keep and bear bowie knives."
 
The group cites ''[[Day v. State]]'' for the precedent that a state may place restrictions on the possession of bowie knives, but the [[Second Amendment]] does not protect a "right to keep and bear bowie knives."
64

edits

Navigation menu