Brief by the National Education Association
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
No. 18-280 No. 18 -1415 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States ___________ NEW YORK STATE RIFLE & PISTOL ASSOCIATION, INC., ET AL., Petitioners, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, NEW YORK, ET AL., Respondents. ___________ On Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit ___________ BRIEF OF THE NATIONAL EDUCATION ASSOCIATION AS AMICUS CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS ___________ ALICE O’BRIEN Counsel of Record JASON WALTA EMMA LEHENY KAITLIN LEARY National Education Association 1201 Sixteenth Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 822-7035 [email protected] August 12, 2019 Mosaic - (301) 927-3800 - Cheverly, MD 49261_Ltrhd.indd 1 6/11/08 12:44:09 AM i TABLE OF CONTENTS Page TBL O THOITIES .................................. iii INTER O ICU RIAE ........................ 1 INTOUCTION SUMMARY O ARGUMENT ........................................................... 1 ARGUMENT ........................................................... 4 I. hool-age hildr Particularly Susceptibl r enc ..... 4 A. iolenc aus devastati harm to children’s psychological and emotional ell-being ................................ 5 B T emotional osts exposur g violenc v irec negativ ect ll children’s ability to learn and develop hool ...................................... 9 II. Thi Cour N sturb It Assuranc Heller tha Restrictions Guns Near Schools Are “Presumptively Lawful” ........................................................... 11 III. T rai Imposing a Rigid ndard Constitutional rutiny ulati Firear ............. 14 A. Rejecting Petitioners’ rigid standard of constitutional scruti i onsistent wi nd ocal legislativ bodi devi r solutions robl g violenc ................................................... 14 B Petitioners’ rigid standard of constitutional ruti threatens o invalida very kind sur ii that most effectively ensure the safety of children and schools ........................... 18 NLSN ..................................................... 21 iii TABLE OF AUTHORITIES Page(s) Cases Bd. of Trs. of State Univ. of N.Y. v. Fox, 492 U.S (1989) ................................................. 4 Brown v. Bd. of Educ., 34 .S. 4 1954) ......... 18 District of Columbia v. Heller, .S (2008 ................................................ 1–3, 11–14 Epperson v. Arkansas 393 .S 97 968 ............ 18 Hall v. Beals, .S. 1969) ......................... 11 McDonald v. City of Chicago 561 S 742 (2010 .............................................................. Missouri v. Jenkins 515 S 70 995 .......... 2 19 Turner Broad. Sys., Inc. v. FCC 512 S 1994) ....................................................... 14 Wisconsin v. Yoder, 4 .S. 1972) .............. 18 Statutes 201 la Sess Law Serv h 018-3 (C.SS 026) ................................................................................ 15 2019 Fla Sess Law Serv. h 019-22 (CSSS 7030) ...................................................................... 15 iv Other Authorities AM. PSYCHIAT ASS’N, DIAGNOST ND STATIST MANUAL F MENTAL DISORDERS 2013) ................................. 5 Evi ad After Surviving Classroom Shooting, L.A. Teacher Reconsiders What School Safety Means EDUCATION WEEK Apr. 18, https://bit.ly/2HtefLB ............... 8 Josep ocher Firearm Localism, YAL L.J. 2013) ............................................ 16–17 Julia dick-Will Neighborhood Violence, Peer Effects, and Academic Achievement in Chicago, SOC. EDUC. 2018) ........... J l., Right to Carry Laws and Violent Crime: A Comprehensive Assessment Using Panel Data‐ ‐ and a State Level Synthetic Control Analysis J. EMPIRI L. STUDIES 2019) .......... 12 ‐ Every for National Educati sociati nd ica Federati eacher Keeping Our Schools Safe: A Plan to Stop Mass Shootings and End Gun Violence in American Schools (Feb 1 019 https://bit.ly/2MZPXJi ........... 4–5, –13, – Patric Fowler al., Community Violence: A Meta-analysis on the Effect of Exposure and Mental Health Outcomes of Children v and Adolescents, DEV. & PSYCHOPATHOLOGY 227 (2009 ............... 6–7, 10 L Gaines How Schools Can Help Kids Traumatized by Gun Violence ILLINO NEWSROOM, May 14, 8, https://bit.ly/2KvXBdQ ................................. 8–9 Ja rbari al., Mitigating the Effects of Gun Violence on Children and Youth, FUTURE CHILD. 2002) ......... 5–7, 9 David Harding, Collateral Consequences of Violence in Disadvantaged Neighborhoods, SOC. FORCES (2009 ............................................................ 6 9 Halla l., Exposure to Violence: Psychological and Academic Correlates in Child Witnesses, A PED ADOLESCENT MED. 2001) ........................ 9 Antoni tsiyanni l. Historical Examination of United States Intentional Mass School Shootings in the 20th and 21st Centuries: Implications for Students, Schools, and Society, J. CHILD & FAMILY STUDIES 2018), https://bit.ly/2YPsPpa ...................................... 4 Dana rl c e l. Children’s Cognitive Performance and Selective Attention Following Recent Community Violence, J. HEALT & SOC. BEHAVIOR 2015) ........................................................... 7 vi NEA oluti -32, http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/Resolutio ns_NEA_HB_2019.pdf ...................................... 1 Propsals educe n ilence Precin r Cniies hile especin he Secnd enden Hearing efore he Subcomm. n he Cnsitutin Ciil ighs n ihs he C n he dicir 113 013 (wri National Educati sociation), http://www.nea.org/home/54528.htm .............. 8 Patric ey The Ace ffec ocal Homicides on Children’s Cognitive Perormane, PROC. NAT’ ACAD. SCI 117 2010), https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1000690107 ...... 10 SUPPORTIN N EDUCATING TRAUMATIZED STUDENTS: A GUID O SCHOOL-BASED PROFESSIONALS (Eric Rossen er Hull ., 013 ................................................. 7 Matthew ull Understanding TS in Children VERYWELL MIND (July 5, 2019), https://www.verywellmind.com/dsm-5- ptsd-criteria-for-children-2797288 .................. 6 H Harvie lkinson II ns Abrins and he nraeling le Law, VA. L. REV. 2 2009) ................ 16, 18 vii Ada nkler Scrtiniing the econd Amendment, MICH. L. REV. 68 (2007) .............................................................. 15 1 INTEREST OF AMICUS CURIAE Thi micus crie brie bmi wit con- sen parties,1 behal National Educa- tion Association (“NEA”). NEA is the nation’s largest professional ssociati representi over l- li member a majority whom v ed- ucator ounselor nd educati ppor profes- sionals in our nation’s public schools. NEA has a deep and ongstanding ommi ensuring t ery child access a gh-quality public ucati T rovi uality cati epend factor most fundamentally stud All dents nd ucati employees t abl lear and nd iv i environments r threats posed by gun violence. NEA’s highest govern- i body affirmed unequivocal ommi thi riority. See NEA Resoluti -32, http://www.nea.org/assets/docs/Resolutions_NEA_HB _2019.pdf T nterests a e—students’ abiliti ear and thrive—are core to NEA’s mis- sion. INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT Jus over a ecad g thi Cour i istrict o Colmi v Heller 554 .S 570 08), con- strued cond Amend confer a individu- al ig bear ar rdless whether holdi i orrec and ould onti b owed, 1 Letters of consent are on file with the Clerk. Amicus states that no party’s counsel authored the brief in whole or in part; no party’s counsel contributed money that was intended to fund preparing or submitting the brief; and no person—other than Amicus—contributed money that was intended to fund preparing or submitting the brief. 2 the Heller ourt properly acnoledged both that “laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places” are presumptively constitutional and that schools are quintessentially “sensitive places.” d. at 626– n.. Petitioners and their supporting amici no urge this ourt to eectively disregard the assurances made in Heller about the validity o these important gun-violence prevention measures and instead to read the econd Amendment to invalidate ny ire- arm restriction that does not have a close historical analog or that otherise ails so-called “strict scruti- ny.” Such an expansive conception of each individu- al’s right to bear arms would imperil longstanding restrictions—including those on the carrying o ire- arms in and around schools—that protect children and the educators ho teach them rom harm. Ater all the strict scrutiny that etitioners and their sup- porting amici call for has famously “proven automati- cally fatal.” Missori v enins 15 U.. 0, (95) (Thomas . concurring). Amicus NEA submits that such an approach to the constitutional validity o sensible irearms regu- lations is both dangerous and unarranted. hildren are uniquely vulnerable to gun violence. Those ho are eposed to gun violence suffer physically emo- tionally, and academically. And such harms are not limited to those children ho suffer or even itness gun violence directly; they etend to all children in a community affected by gun violence. As a result any standard o revie that this ourt might adopt or constitutional challenges to gun regulations must retain Heller’s presumption of constitutionality for “laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools.” 554 .S. at . n order to protect both children and the insti- 3 tution of education itself laws regulating the carry- ing and possession of guns in schools must remain “presumptively lawful regulatory measures.” See id at 2 n.. More broadly this ourt should reect any consti- tutional standard—especially the strict-scrutiny