@article{ref1,
title=""The people" of the Second Amendment: citizenship and the right to bear arms",
journal="NYU law review",
year="2010",
author="Gulasekaram, Pratheepan",
volume="85",
number="5",
pages="1521-1580",
abstract="The Supreme Court's recent Second Amendment decision, District of   Columbia v. Heller, asserts that the Constitution's right to bear arms   is an individual right to armed self-defense held by law-abiding   &quot;citizens.&quot; This Article examines the implications of this description,   concluding that the Second Amendment cannot concurrently be a right of   armed self-defense and restricted to citizens. The Article proceeds in   three parts. First, it analyzes the term &quot;the people&quot; as it has been   interpreted in recent Court cases. The Article concludes that   constitutional text and Supreme Court jurisprudence provide no   sustainable basis to believe the Second Amendment is limited to   citizens. Second, the Article situates Heller within a historical   context of gun regulation motivated by racial animus and xenophobia,   manifested by contractions of citizenship to exclude-and gun laws   intended to disarm racial minorities and noncitizens. Third, the Article   attempts to revive a coherent theory justifying the limitation of gun   rights to citizens but ultimately concludes that armed self-defense is   conceptually unrelated to historically political rights such as voting   and jury service. Thus, Heller's holding regarding who is entitled to   armed self-defense is logically unsound and doctrinally troubling.<p />",
language="en",
issn="",
doi="",
url="http://dx.doi.org/"
}