...
首页> 外文期刊>American journal of public health >Changing the constitutional landscape for firearms: the US Supreme Court's recent Second Amendment decisions.
【24h】

Changing the constitutional landscape for firearms: the US Supreme Court's recent Second Amendment decisions.

机译:改变枪支的宪法格局:美国最高法院最近的第二修正案裁决。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

In 2 recent cases-with important implications for public health practitioners, courts, and researchers-the US Supreme Court changed the landscape for judging the constitutionality of firearm laws under the Constitution's Second Amendment. In District of Columbia v Heller (2008), the court determined for the first time that the Second Amendment grants individuals a personal right to possess handguns in their home. In McDonald v City of Chicago (2010), the court concluded that this right affects the powers of state and local governments. The court identified broad categories of gun laws-other than handgun bans-that remain presumptively valid but did not provide a standard to judge their constitutionality. We discuss ways that researchers can assist decision makers.
机译:在最近的两起案件中(对公共卫生从业人员,法院和研究人员都有重要意义),美国最高法院改变了根据《宪法第二修正案》判断枪支法是否符合宪法的情况。在哥伦比亚特区诉海勒(2008)一案中,法院首次裁定《第二修正案》授予个人在家中拥有手枪的个人权利。在麦当劳诉芝加哥市一案(2010年)中,法院得出结论,这项权利影响到州和地方政府的权力。法院确定了除枪支禁令外的广泛的枪支法律类别,这些法律在假定上仍然有效,但没有提供判断其合宪性的标准。我们讨论研究人员可以帮助决策者的方法。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号