Legal Scholar Series: NRA’s Joseph Greenlee & George Mocsary of Wyoming Univ. Discuss 2A Case Law.

Published on April 27, 2026
Duration: 60:15

This video features legal scholars Joseph Greenlee and George Mocsary discussing the Second Amendment's application to young adults (18-20 years old). They analyze current legal challenges, circuit court splits, and the historical interpretation of the Second Amendment, particularly in light of Supreme Court decisions like Heller and Bruen. The discussion highlights the 'infancy theory' used by some courts to restrict rights and the importance of proper historical analogy in legal reasoning.

Quick Summary

The Second Amendment rights of young adults (18-20) are subject to a split in federal appellate courts. Some circuits recognize these individuals as full citizens with rights, striking down bans, while others use the 'infancy theory' to uphold restrictions, claiming historical lack of rights. This legal debate is central to ongoing Second Amendment litigation.

Chapters

  1. 00:06Introduction to Firearms Research Center Seminar
  2. 00:28Special Q&A Format with Joseph Greenlee
  3. 00:42Article on Firearm Rights of Young Adults
  4. 01:44Biography of Joseph Greenlee
  5. 02:50Video Series on Second Amendment Scholarship
  6. 03:06Introduction of George Mocsary
  7. 03:45Discussion of Mocsary's Article: Treating Young Adults as Citizens
  8. 03:59Second Amendment Rights for Adults Under 21
  9. 04:25Lower Court Treatment of Young Adult Firearm Rights
  10. 04:45Circuit Court Splits on Age Restrictions
  11. 05:14The 'Infancy Theory' in Court Rulings
  12. 06:13Critique of Legal Abstraction in Bruen Analysis
  13. 06:27Bruen's Guidance on Historical Analysis
  14. 07:09Applying Historical Analogies in Modern Law
  15. 08:14John Stuart Mill Quote: Tyranny of the Majority
  16. 08:36Constitution as an Anti-Majoritarian Document
  17. 09:08Individual Rights Trump Majority Preference
  18. 09:21Young Adults as Full Citizens with Rights
  19. 09:45Judges and the Spirit of Power
  20. 10:28Summary of District of Columbia v. Heller
  21. 10:42Heller's Key Holdings
  22. 11:48Heller's Implication for Carrying Arms Outside the Home
  23. 12:19Long-Standing, Presumptively Lawful Regulations
  24. 13:16Lower Court Response to Heller
  25. 13:50Judicial Defiance of Second Amendment Jurisprudence
  26. 14:47Evidence of Judicial Hostility to Gun Rights
  27. 16:06Post-Bruen Hostility from Judges
  28. 16:41Lower Success Rates in Second Amendment Cases
  29. 17:39Pattern of Burden Shifting and Pretextual Analysis
  30. 18:02Ninth Circuit's Rehearing Practices
  31. 18:35Citations to Judicial Hostility
  32. 19:01Focus on Drake v. Filco
  33. 19:19Drake v. Filco: New Jersey's May-Issue Statute
  34. 20:08The Two-Part Test Post-McDonald
  35. 21:11Drake Court's Ruling on Public Carriage
  36. 21:26Critique of 'Long-Standing' Presumption in Drake
  37. 22:14Drake Court's Dismissal of Shall-Issue Carry Argument
  38. 22:33Drake Court's 'Intermediate Scrutiny' Analysis
  39. 23:48Reliance on Legislative 'Predictive Judgment'
  40. 24:17Justification for Lack of Evidence in Drake
  41. 24:48Evidence Outside Legislative Record (U.S. v. Marzzarella)
  42. 25:19Drake Court's Failure to Explain Evidence Requirements

Frequently Asked Questions

How have lower courts treated the Second Amendment rights of young adults (18-20)?

There is a significant split among federal appellate courts. The Third, Fifth, and Eighth Circuits have struck down bans on firearm possession for young adults, viewing them as full citizens. Conversely, the Fourth, Tenth, and Eleventh Circuits have upheld such bans, often using the 'infancy theory' which claims individuals under 21 lacked full rights at the founding.

What is the 'infancy theory' and why is it criticized in Second Amendment cases?

The 'infancy theory' suggests that because individuals aged 18-20 were considered legal infants at the time of the U.S. founding, their Second Amendment rights can be restricted. Critics argue this theory incorrectly equates historical legal infancy with a complete lack of rights and fails to acknowledge the evolving understanding of citizenship and constitutional protections.

What was the significance of the Supreme Court's Heller decision regarding the Second Amendment?

Heller (2008) definitively established that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms, separate from militia service. It affirmed the right to possess a functional firearm in the home for self-defense and implied protection for carrying arms outside the home.

How does the Bruen decision impact the analysis of historical firearms laws?

Bruen mandates that courts must conduct a historical analysis to determine the constitutionality of firearms regulations. It emphasizes that the Constitution applies to modern circumstances beyond those the founders anticipated and requires courts to use historical analogies appropriately, not to abstract away from relevant historical precedents.

What issues were raised by the Drake v. Filco case regarding firearm carry laws?

Drake v. Filco highlighted New Jersey's restrictive 'may-issue' carry statute and the Third Circuit's flawed analysis. The court relied on the statute's 'long-standing' nature and the legislature's 'predictive judgment' without sufficient evidence, failing to properly apply constitutional scrutiny and address Heller's implications for public carry.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from NRA

View all →