Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf
Page Number: 132

Cite as:  597 U. S. ____ (2022) 

49 

BREYER, J., dissenting 

did not strip felons of the right to bear arms simply because 
of their status as felons”).  Like JUSTICE KAVANAUGH, I un-
derstand the Court’s opinion today to cast no doubt on that
aspect of Heller’s holding.  Ante, at 3 (concurring opinion).
But unlike JUSTICE KAVANAUGH, I find the disconnect be-
tween Heller’s treatment of laws prohibiting, for example, 
firearms  possession  by  felons  or  the  mentally  ill,  and  the
Court’s treatment of New York’s licensing regime, hard to 
square.  The  inconsistency  suggests  that  the  Court  today 
takes either an unnecessarily cramped view of the relevant 
historical record or a needlessly rigid approach to analogi-
cal reasoning. 

* 

* 

* 

The  historical  examples  of  regulations  similar  to  New 
York’s licensing regime are legion.  Closely analogous Eng-
lish laws were enacted beginning in the 13th century, and 
similar American regulations were passed during the colo-
nial period, the founding era, the 19th century, and the 20th 
century.  Not all of these laws were identical to New York’s, 
but that is inevitable in an analysis that demands exami-
nation  of  seven  centuries  of  history.    At  a  minimum,  the 
laws I have recounted resembled New York’s law, similarly
restricting the right to publicly carry weapons and serving
roughly similar purposes.  That is all that the Court’s test, 
which allows and even encourages “analogical reasoning,” 
purports to require.  See ante, at 21 (disclaiming the neces-
sity of a “historical twin”).

In each instance, the Court finds a reason to discount the 
historical  evidence’s  persuasive  force.  Some  of  the  laws 
New York has identified are too old.  But others are too re-
cent.  Still others did not last long enough.  Some applied to
too few people.  Some were enacted for the wrong reasons.
Some  may  have  been  based  on  a  constitutional  rationale 
that is now impossible to identify.  Some arose in histori-
cally unique circumstances.  And some are not sufficiently