Dru Stevenson, Professor of Law

On April 22, 2026, I participated in a virtual discourse hosted by Jennifer Mascia of The Trace , featuring Mark Barden (Co‑Founder of Sandy Hook Promise) and filmmaker Josh Seftel . The session focused on Seftel’s documentary All the Empty Rooms and the broader sociological impact of firearm‑related trauma in the United States. It was especially valuable to hear Seftel describe how he selected this project and approached its development and production. Mark Barden’s perspective—as a parent who lost a child in a school shooting—added a level of moral clarity and lived experience that is often missing from policy debates. His discussion of Sandy Hook Promise’s most impactful initiatives underscored the importance of sustained, evidence‑informed advocacy. Narrative evidence of the kind presented in the film provides a qualitative counterweight to the quantitative data typically used in administrative rulemaking or legislative testimony on firearm policy. It also serves as a rea...

Source: Jiru, G. B., & Worrall, J. L. (2026). Disaggregating enforcement: Evidence on certainty, severity, and firearm homicide under the ATF zero tolerance policy. Journal of Criminal Justice, 104, 102643. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcrimjus.2026.102643 Which violence-prevention policies actually "work," or are most effective for reducing gun violence? Here is a fascinating new study about the Biden-era crackdown on gun dealers. Warning letters and expectation of inspections reduced gun violence; severe sanctions like FFL revocation, not so much. For those of us advocating for safer gun laws, a new study in the Journal of Criminal Justice (Jiru & Worrall, 2026) offers a critical piece of evidence-based strategy. The researchers analyzed the impact of federal enforcement on firearm homicides, and the results are revelatory for our policy agendas. The article is  Disaggregating Enforcement: Evidence on Certainty, Severity, and Firearm Homicide Under the ATF Zero Toler...

This post summarizes the First Circuit’s decision in Beckwith v. Frey (2025), which upheld Maine’s 72‑hour waiting period for firearm purchases. The court resolved the case at Bruen Step 1, concluding that waiting‑period laws regulate the commercial acquisition of firearms rather than conduct protected by the Second Amendment’s plain text. This post outlines the court’s reasoning, doctrinal significance, and implications for post‑ Bruen litigation. Background Maine enacted a 72‑hour waiting period for all firearm purchases. A district court enjoined the law, but the First Circuit reversed, holding that plaintiffs were unlikely to succeed on the merits of their Second Amendment claim. Backstory   While the First Circuit panel was unanimous, it’s worth noting that Maine—the state in question—has a unique legal culture regarding firearms. For decades, Maine resisted waiting periods, priding itself on a "sporting" tradition. It wasn't until the tragic mass shooting in ...

We like to think of the law as a set of firm, historical facts. You either committed a crime, or you didn't. You either qualify for a right, or you are disqualified. But right now, the Department of Justice is grappling with a much more "revelatory" question: Can the law predict the future? In July 2025, the DOJ proposed new rules to revive the long-dormant gun rights restoration program under 18 U.S.C. § 925(c). The core of this program hinges on a single, heavy word: Dangerousness . If a person with a prior disqualifying record wants their rights restored, they must prove they are no longer "dangerous." The Rest of the Story The surprise isn't that we are asking the question—it’s how we are trying to answer it. We are moving away from mere "gut feelings" by judges and toward a sophisticated, albeit controversial, blend of clinical art and data science. In a recent piece I wrote for the Duke Second Thoughts blog (which was also cross-posted on t...

My latest academic article published - Revisiting the Original Congressional Debates About the Second Amendment - #2A Thanks to the editors at Missouri Law Review for editing/publishing it. Read/download here: https://scholarship.law.missouri.edu/mlr/vol88/iss2/9/

Ethical Issues with Lawyers Openly Carrying Firearms    St. Mary’s Journal on Legal Malpractice & Ethics (Forthcoming) December 18, 2019 Abstract Ethical concerns arise when lawyers openly carry firearms to adversarial meetings related to representation, such as depositions and settlement negotiations. Visible firearms introduce an element of intimidation, or at least the potential for misunderstandings and escalation of conflicts. The adverse effects of openly carried firearms can impact opposing parties, opposing counsel, the lawyer’s potential clients, witnesses, and even judges and jurors encountered outside the courtroom. The ABA’s Model Rules of Professional in their current form include provisions that could be applicable, such as rules against coercion and intimidation, but there is no explicit reference to firearms. Several reported incidents with lawyers and firearms have occurred in recent years, and as states liberalize their “open carry” laws, as well ...

Gun Violence as an Obstacle to Educational Equality   University of Memphis Law Review, Forthcoming Abstract:  This paper addresses the issue of school gun violence as both a result and a cause of ongoing educational inequality. First, gun violence and homicides have reached epidemic levels in recent years among minority teenagers in the United States, and the constant disruption, trauma, and fear that go along with such day to day violence significantly affect the educational and psychological development of urban youth, and thus their eventual educational and career achievements. Second, media attention and recent legislative initiatives to permit or require guns in schools (arming teachers, etc.) focus on the comparatively rare phenomenon of active shooter scenarios (school massacres or shooting rampages), which are predominantly a suburban phenomenon, while ignoring the causes and effects of routine, lower-fatality gun incidents in poorer urban schools. Measures ...

Dec. 18, 2019 - forthcoming in Penn State Law Review Smart Guns, the Law, and the Second Amendment   https://ssrn.com/abstract=3500570   Abstract:  Smart guns, which originally meant personalized guns that only the owner could fire, had a false start as a promising new technology several years ago. Nevertheless, policymakers have shown renewed interest in the wake of highly publicized incidents of gun violence, as well as advances in technology. The first generation of smart guns foundered on problems with the reliability of the technology, as well as a legislative misstep that would have banned all other guns as soon as smart guns appeared in the retail market, triggering massive boycotts of certain manufacturers and dealers, and a subsequent abandonment of the project by the gun industry overall. Newer technologies, however, such as improved biometric grip identifiers, precision-guided rifles that rarely miss, blockchain or “glockchain” automated tracking, ...

I have a new article draft posted on SSRN:  GOING GUNLESS   photo by  Maria Lysenko Stevenson, Drury D., Going Gunless (July 13, 2019).  Available at SSRN:  https://ssrn.com/abstract=3419585 Abstract Firearm policy in the United States is subject to longstanding political gridlock; victories and losses for each side of the issue run neck-and-neck. This Article inverts the problem and proposes a system for voluntary registration and certification of non-owners, those who want to waive or renounce their Second Amendment rights as a matter of personal conviction. The proposed system is analogous to both the registration of conscientious objectors during wartime conscriptions, and the newer suicide prevention laws whereby individuals can add their names to a do-not-sell list for firearm dealers – though the proposal made here is broader and more permanent. Voluntary registration, with official certification, would serve three important purposes. First, ...