Skip to main content


On May 16, 2016, in Teixeira v. County of Alameda, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held that a zoning ordinance was not presumptively lawful under the Second Amendment. The court utilized the two-step analysis derived from the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2008 decision in District of Columbia v. Heller to examine the constitutionality of the ordinance. The court remanded the case and recommended that the district court apply a heighted level of scrutiny—potentially even strict scrutiny. On December 27, 2016, the Ninth Circuit ordered an en banc rehearing. This Comment argues that on rehearing, the Ninth Circuit should analyze, or recommend that the district court analyze, the zoning ordinance at an intermediate scrutiny level. Intermediate scrutiny has been utilized by a majority of courts in Second Amendment challenges, and should be used on rehearing because the ordinance does not present a substantial burden to the core of the Second Amendment right.


File nameDate UploadedVisibilityFile size
8 Sep 2022
350 kB



  • Subject
    • Constitutional Law

    • Courts

    • Property Law and Real Estate

    • Second Amendment

  • Journal title
    • Boston College Law Review

  • Volume
    • 58

  • Issue
    • 6

  • Pagination
    • E. Supp. 76

  • Date submitted

    8 September 2022