The Supreme Court's 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen established a new test for assessing the constitutionality of firearms regulations under the Second Amendment. Bruen's test focuses on the text of the Second Amendment and the history of the right to keep and bear arms. Some scholars have criticized Bruen's methodology as being inconsistent with the Founding-era conception of rights. Given that Bruen presents itself as a faithful recovery of the original meaning of the Second Amendment, these historical criticisms have the potential to undermine Bruen's legitimacy. But are these criticisms right, and how should the Supreme Court adjudicate claims under the Second Amendment in light of the Founding-era conception of rights? 

J. Joel Alicea is the St. Robert Bellarmine Professor of Law at the Catholic University of America’s Columbus School of Law and the Director of the Law School’s Center for the Constitution and the Catholic Intellectual Tradition. He served as a law clerk for Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., on the United States Supreme Court and for Judge Diarmuid F. O’Scannlain on the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Professor Alicea’s scholarship focuses on constitutional theory and has appeared in the Yale Law Journal, the University of Pennsylvania Law Review, the Virginia Law Review, and the Notre Dame Law Review, among other publications. Professor Alicea is a graduate of Harvard Law School and Princeton University.