The 'Sensitive Places' Doctrine: Locational Limits on the Right to Bear Arms

Charleston Law Review Vol. 13 (2018)

90 Pages Posted: 10 May 2019

See all articles by David B. Kopel

David B. Kopel

Independence Institute; Denver University - Sturm College of Law; Cato Institute

Joseph Greenlee

Millennial Policy Center; The Heartland Institute

Date Written: 2018

Abstract

Where may the government prohibit the bearing of arms? In District of Columbia v. Heller, the U.S. Supreme Court offered a short answer: “in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings.” This Article examines the historical foundation and the modern application of the sensitive places doctrine.

Heller’s terse “sensitive places” dicta was part of a list of three types of “presumptively lawful regulatory measures.” The Court promised that “there will be time enough to expound upon the historical justifications for the exceptions we have mentioned if and when those exceptions come before us.”

Since the 2008 Heller opinion, the Court has not elaborated on the meaning of “sensitive places.” Thus, lower courts have been required to find their own answers.

This Article is the first to analyze the full scope of the sensitive places doctrine. Part I examines English history, starting with a 1313 law that forbade bringing arms to Parliament. Protecting government deliberation from violent interference is the core of the sensitive places tradition.

Part II looks at colonial America and the Founding. Several colonial and early state laws safeguarded government deliberation by barring arms from courts or polling places. Some scholars have argued that in England and Early America, arms carrying was prohibited everywhere. Parts I and II address that argument.

Part III covers the nineteenth century, when more states enacted laws for protection of government deliberation. A few states enacted laws against carrying arms at most public or private gatherings.

Part IV surveys the twentieth century and the pre-Heller portion of the twenty-first.

Post-Heller precedent is covered in part V, as courts have tried to decide what places are “like” schools and government buildings.

Finally, Part VI consolidates the rules of the “sensitive places” doctrine, based on text, history, tradition, and precedent.

Keywords: sensitive places, Second Amendment, right to bear arms, District of Columbia v. Heller

JEL Classification: K14, K39, K42

Suggested Citation

Kopel, David B. and Greenlee, Joseph, The 'Sensitive Places' Doctrine: Locational Limits on the Right to Bear Arms (2018). Charleston Law Review Vol. 13 (2018). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3361371 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3361371

David B. Kopel (Contact Author)

Independence Institute ( email )

727 East 16th Ave
Denver, CO 80203
United States
303-279-6536 (Phone)
303-279-4176 (Fax)

HOME PAGE: http://www.davekopel.org

Denver University - Sturm College of Law

2255 E. Evans Avenue
Denver, CO 80208
United States

HOME PAGE: http://www.davekopel.org

Cato Institute ( email )

1000 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001-5403
United States

HOME PAGE: http://https://www.cato.org/people/david-kopel

Joseph Greenlee

Millennial Policy Center ( email )

3443 S. Galena St., #120
Denver, CO 80231

The Heartland Institute ( email )

3939 North Wilke Road
Arlington Heights, IL 60004
United States
(312) 377-4000 (Phone)
(312) 277-4122 (Fax)

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
29
Abstract Views
140
PlumX Metrics