[Burnham, W. (2006). Introduction to the Law and Legal System of the United States. Thomson West.]Search in Google Scholar
[Card, R.L. (2009). An opinion without standards: The Supreme Court’s refusal to adopt a standard of constitutional review in District of Columbia v. Heller will likely cause headaches for future judicial review of gun-control regula- tions, 23 BYU J. Pub. L. 259.]Search in Google Scholar
[Chemerinsky E. (2000). A Jurisprudence of Justice Scalia: A Critical Appraisal, 22 U. Haw. L. Rev. 385.]Search in Google Scholar
[Constitution Facts: http://www.constitutionfacts.com/us-constitution-amendments/fascinating-facts/.]Search in Google Scholar
[Cornell S. (2006). A Well Regulated Militia. The Founding Fathers and the Origins of Gun Control in America. Oxford University Press.]Search in Google Scholar
[Dobbins & Jeffrey, C. (2009-2010). Structure and precedent, 108Mich. L. Rev. 1454.]Search in Google Scholar
[Field III & Thomas G. (1999-2000). The role of stare decisis in the Federal Circuit, 9 Fed. Cir. B.J. 203.]Search in Google Scholar
[Frye, B.L. (2009). The Peculiar Story of United States v. Miller, 3 N.Y.U.J.L. & Liberty 48.]Search in Google Scholar
[Jones, B., Monkey, S. & Monkey, D. (2009). The Establishment Clause as Possibly Illustrative of the Second Amendment’s Incorporation, 74 Brook. L. Rev. 509.]Search in Google Scholar
[Kelso & Randall, R. (1994). Styles of Constitutional Interpretation and the Four Main Approaches to Constitutional Interpretation in American Legal His- tory, 29 Val. U. L. Rev. 121.]Search in Google Scholar
[Liptak, A. (2009). On the Bench and Off, the Eminently Quotable Justice Scalia, New York Times, May 11, 2009, p. A13.]Search in Google Scholar
[Lund, N. (2009). The Second Amendment, Heller and Originalist Jurisprudence, 56 UCLA L. Rev. 1343.]Search in Google Scholar
[NRA Gun Laws, National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action. Re- tieved from http://www.nraila.org/gun-laws.aspx.]Search in Google Scholar
[Senior, J. (2013). In Conversation: Antonin Scalia, New York. Retrieved October 6, 2013, from http://nymag.com/news/features/antonin-scalia-2013-10/#.]Search in Google Scholar
[Smith, P.J. (2011). How Different Are Originalism and Non-Originalism?, 62 HASTINGS L. J. 707.]Search in Google Scholar
[Solum & Lawrence, B. (2013). Originalism and Constitutional Construction (Au- gust 7, 2013). 82 Fordham L. Rev. 453.]Search in Google Scholar
[Thomas & Kenneth, R. (2011). Selected Theories of Constitutional Interpretation, CRS Report for Congress, February 15, 2011.]Search in Google Scholar
[Westover & Casey, L. (2005). Structural Interpretation and the New Federal- ism: Finding the Proper Balance Between State Sovereignty and Federal Supremacy, 88 Marq. L. Rev. 693.]Search in Google Scholar
[Whittington Keith, E. (2008). Is originalism too conservative?, 34 Harv. J.L.&Pub. Pol’y 29.]Search in Google Scholar
[Arizona v. United States [567 U.S. (2012)].]Search in Google Scholar
[District of Columbia v Heller [554 U.S. 570 (2008)].]Search in Google Scholar
[Lawrence v. Texas [539 U.S. 558 (2003)].]Search in Google Scholar
[LULAC v. Perry [548 U. S. 399 (2006)].]Search in Google Scholar
[Marbury v Madison 5 U.S. 137 (1803).]Search in Google Scholar
[McDonald v City of Chicago [561 U.S. 3025 (2010)].]Search in Google Scholar
[Morrison v. Olson [487 U.S. 654 (1988)].]Search in Google Scholar
[Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252, 265 (1886).]Search in Google Scholar
[United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542,553 (1875).]Search in Google Scholar
[United States v. Miller [307 U.S. 174 (1939)].]Search in Google Scholar
[United States v. Sprague, 282 U.S. 716, 731 (1931).]Search in Google Scholar
[United States v. Windsor [570 U.S. (2013)]. ]Search in Google Scholar
