Pocket Pistols, Spanish Stilettos and Arkansas Toothpicks - A Post-Bruen History of Weapons Regulations in Tennessee

Aug 24, 2026

Upload by Paura

A post-Bruen analysis examines how Tennessee weapon regulations evolved after the Supreme Court’s decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. The work reviews the “text, history, and tradition” framework through the majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions, then surveys Tennessee’s restrictions on carrying and possessing weapons, emphasizing laws at the Founding and during Reconstruction. It also evaluates how other states have applied Bruen and offers guidance for persuading Tennessee courts and lawmakers to adopt reforms consistent with the new standard.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages18

Reading Time45 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

Tennessee gun reform and the impact of Bruen

Analyzing Bruen

The New York licensing regime before Bruen

Purpose and structure of the Sullivan licensing system

Bruen’s petitioners and the denial of expanded permits

The Court’s review of New York’s laws

Pocket Pistols, Spanish Stilettos and Arkansas Toothpicks: A post-Bruen history of weapons regulations in Tennessee By Emily Anne Crawford Mentored By Jacqueline Dixon Submitted for fulfillment of the rigorous writing requirement for the degree of Juris Doctor at the Nashville School of Law 2024 The reason of the stringent laws against carrying deadly weapons is that the law presumes that the intention of the offender is to take life, and next to the sovereignty of the state does the state hold the lives of its citizens, being very jealous of their protection and preservation.1 - Knoxville Sentinel, 1899 I. INTRODUCTION When Melissa Alexander met with Tennessee lawmakers to discuss gun reform, she expected to talk about gun safes, background checks, and red flag laws. Instead, she got a primerin Supreme Court jurisprudence. “All we heard was Bruen,” Alexander said. “Bruen, Bruen, Bruen.”2 Referring to New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen,3 lawmakers told Alexander that most gun reforms were not possible under the recently decided Bruen standard. Ms. Alexander is the mother of a student at The Covenant School in Nashville, Tenn. In March of 2023, she was horrified to learn that a school shooter had shot through the doors to the building and committed an act of mass murder that killed three children and three adults. While her child was physically unharmed, the school’s collective grief over the staggering loss motivated Alexander to meet with lawmakers to discuss how such a tragedy could be prevented in the future. What seemed like common sense measures to Alexander, a lifelong Republican and gun owner, were met with staunch resistance. The special session called by the governor to consider reforms in the wake of the Covenant shooting resulted in no meaningful firearm legislation.4 This paper will first analyze the Bruen decision, offering a close reading of the text of the majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions, including the “text, history, and tradition” standard it introduced. Next, a thorough examination of Tennessee’s laws restricting weapons will be given, with special attention paid to laws at the time of the Founding and during the Reconstruction era. This paper will then examine how other states are already applying Bruen, sometimes with surprising results. Finally, a conclusion will be offered with suggestions for those looking to persuade Tennessee courts and lawmakers under the new standard. II. ANALYZING BRUEN The lawmakers citing Bruen as an obstruction to new firearm legislation rely on it because the decision struck down New York’s existing gun licensing regime. The case merits a close review because Bruen is often used to justify a rejection of gun reform legislation, sometimes before specific measures are even proposed. Prior to the landmark case, New York state did not allow the unlicensed possession of handguns.5 The law required those wishing to carry to apply for a handgun license to show “good cause” or “proper cause” to be able to carry a gun outside the home for reasons other than camping, hunting, or similar outdoor pursuits.6 A licensing officer reviewed applications for unrestricted 1 Deadly Weapons: State’s Statute is Explicit in Its Declaration as to What Constitutes These—Jealous ofthe Lives of Its Citizens., Knoxville Sentinel (Nov. 25, 1899) . 2 Melissa Alexander, Panel Discussion at Lawyer’s Association for Women Membership Meeting: Tennessee's Gun Laws: Is There Room for Compromise? (Sept. 19, 2023) . 3 N. Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen, 597 U. S. 1 (2022) . 4 Kevin Sullivan, Tenn. lawmakers refused to act on guns. A GOP mother is still pushing., WASH. POST (Aug. 30, 2023), [https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/08/30/tennessee-legislature-gun-laws-melissa-alexander/](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/08/30/tennessee-legislature-gun-laws-melissa-alexander/) . 5 N.Y. PENAL LAW § 265.20 (2023) . 6 Id. lic

FAQs

What is the core purpose of the paper’s analysis of Bruen?

The paper closely reads the Bruen decision’s majority, concurring, and dissenting opinions and explains the “text, history, and tradition” standard that Bruen introduced.

How does the paper connect Bruen to Tennessee’s weapon regulations?

It surveys Tennessee laws restricting weapons, with particular attention to regulations during the Founding period and the Reconstruction era, to show how Bruen’s framework affects what lawmakers and courts may accept.

Why do Tennessee lawmakers cite Bruen as an obstacle to gun reform?

They rely on Bruen because it struck down New York’s gun licensing regime, and it is often used to justify rejecting gun reforms even before specific measures are proposed.

Aug 24, 2026

Upload by Paura