Pepperdine Law Review Hosts Annual Symposium on the Second Amendment After Bruen and Rahimi
On Friday, March 27, 2026, the Pepperdine Law Review hosted its annual symposium titled "The Second Amendment After Bruen and Rahimi: Revisiting History and Tradition. " The day-long event, held in Caruso Auditorium, brought together leading scholars from across the country to explore the shifting landscape of the Second Amendment in the wake of the Supreme Court's decisions in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022) and United States v. Rahimi (2024).
The symposium began with welcoming remarks from symposium editor Marcello Jones. Four thought-provoking panels and a keynote speaker then followed throughout the day, with professor Jacob Charles serving as the event’s master of ceremonies. The first panel, “Methodology After Bruen: Defining 'Relevant Tradition' and Judging Historical Facts” featured professors Joel Alicea, Darrell Miller, and Megan Walsh, and was moderated by professor Barry McDonald. The discussion examined the practical and theoretical challenges courts face when applying Bruen’s history-and-tradition test, including with a focus on how lower courts understood their task and applied the test in the aftermath of Bruen.
The second panel, “Rahimi and the Shifting Second Amendment,” explored Rahimi and its implications for prohibited possessor laws, like laws disarming people with past felony convictions. It also addressed whether Rahimi signals a softening of the Bruen test or a narrowing of its application. Professors Mary Anne Franks, Haley Proctor, and Eric Ruben participated in this discussion, with professor Joel Johnson moderating.
At lunch, professor Jacob Charles hosted Judge Jason Pulliam as the symposium’s keynote conversation, where the two engaged in an open question and answer dialogue.
The third panel, “Race, Reconstruction, and the Selective Memory of the Second Amendment,” moderated by professor Jacob Charles, centered the racial and historical exclusions embedded in the Second Amendment’s traditional narrative. Professors Saul Cornell, Christine Goodman, and Nicholas Johnson investigated how race, class, and gender shaped early American gun laws—and how those exclusions complicate Bruen’s historical test.
The fourth and final panel, “Beyond Guns–Bruen’s Ripple Effect on Other Constitutional Rights,” featured a conversation between professors Brittney Lane Kubisch, Francesca Procaccini, and Adam Winkler. Moderated by professor David Han, the discussion explored whether Bruen’s history-and-tradition framework will (or should) be extended to other constitutional contexts, such as First Amendment, voting rights, criminal procedure, or other areas.
