Professor Jacob Charles Cited in Pennsylvania Supreme Court Case Barris v. Stroud Township

Professor Jacob D. Charles is cited in the opinion of the Pennsylvania Supreme Court Middle District case Jonathan Barris v. Stroud Township. The case considers the legality of a township ordinance that prohibits the discharging of firearms within the township, subject to certain exceptions, including the discharging of firearms at indoor and outdoor shooting ranges. 

Excerpt from Jonathan Barris v. Stroud Township

First, the Bruen Court had “little difficulty” concluding the plain text of the Second Amendment protected the petitioners’ proposed course of conduct — carrying handguns publicly for self-defense. Id. at 32. However, the parties did not dispute this point, presumably in recognition of the fact that “[n]othing in the Second Amendment’s text draws a home/public distinction with respect to the right to keep and bear arms[.]” Id.; see id. (definition of “bear” “naturally encompasses public carry”). Thus, notwithstanding the extensive guidance the Court provided with respect to its history-and-tradition test, it said comparatively little — because it was simply not at issue — about how courts should first determine “[w]hen the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct” such that it is “presumptively protect[ed.]” Id. at 24.8

____________

8 It is perhaps significant the Court, even prior to “turn[ing] to whether the plain text of the Second Amendment protect[ed the] proposed course of conduct[,]” first considered (1) whether the petitioners were “part of ‘the people’ whom the Second Amendment protects” and (2) if the handguns at issue in that case were “weapons ‘in common use’ today for self-defense.” Bruen, 597 U.S. at 32. See Jacob D. Charles, The Dead Hand of a Silent Past: Bruen, Gun Rights, and the Shackles of History, 73 DUKE L.J. 67, 97 (2023) (observing Bruen “did not expressly specify what must fall within the plain text”; “Does the first step include deciphering whether the challenged conduct, weapon, and person claiming a right are covered?”) (emphasis in original).

The complete opinion may be found at Jonathan Barris v. Stroud Township