Since Heller was decided nearly two decades ago, there have been attempts to draw analogies between the First and Second Amendment. Of course, this transplantation was always problematic. First Amendment doctrine is, for the most part, not originalist. The cases are laden with balancing tests that have little concern for original meaning. The entire notion of tiers of scrutiny is judge-made law. Why corrupt this new originalist frontier by transplanting the tainted soil of the Warren Court? Well, it is familiar, and judges do what is familiar. Still, it was a surprise when Bruen simultaneously repudiated balancing tests and looked to the First Amendment cases as a model.
In Wolford v. Lopez, the Court continued its interest with the First Amendment to resolve a Second Amendment case. And Chief Justice Roberts, usually not one for doctrine, was leading the charge.
In this exchange, Roberts seemed to analogize carrying a weapon's on someone's property to walking to someone's doorstep to drop off pamphlets.
