United States v. Hemani · ¶82

As I and others have elsewhere explained, Bruen is unworkable. It imposes on judges the unfamiliar and difficult tasks of sifting through centuries-old evidence in order to answer “contested historical questions,” and “applying those answers to resolve contemporary problems.” 597 U. S., at 107 (Breyer, J., dissenting). Given those challenges, it is unsurprising that Bruen's test is vulnerable to inconsistent and arbitrary application, as judges draw different conclusions from the same historical evidence and reach divergent assessments of the same laws. See Rahimi, 602 U. S., at 743 (Jackson, J., concurring).

preliminary print (page proof)
Source edition
Passage preview. Read in context for the complete text, notes and references.