On Monday, the Supreme Court opted not to take up two significant cases regarding gun legislation in the U.S. These cases involved a Maryland law banning assault-style weapons, including the infamous AR-15 semiautomatic rifle, and a Rhode Island restriction on large-capacity magazines. The decision means that both laws will continue to be enforced, maintaining the current legal landscape surrounding these controversial gun regulations.
Litigation over similar bans is ongoing across the country, and it is anticipated that the issue of assault weapons will return to the Supreme Court in the near future. The court currently possesses a 6-3 conservative majority that has expanded gun rights significantly. However, there has been a noticeable hesitance in recent months to engage with new cases regarding the scope of the right to bear arms as defined by the Second Amendment.
Despite the court's recent reluctance, it appears likely that the assault weapons issue will be revisited soon. Notably, three conservative justices expressed a desire to take up the matter, while Justice Brett Kavanaugh indicated his wish for the justices to hear a related case within the next couple of years. To bring a case before the court, four votes are necessary. Kavanaugh, in a separate statement, noted that the ruling upholding the Maryland ban raises questions under the court's recent precedents, suggesting that the court should address the AR-15 issue soon due to its significance among American gun owners.
In a landmark ruling in 2022, the Supreme Court expanded gun rights, establishing for the first time that the right to bear arms extends beyond the home. This pivotal decision has triggered a wave of new restrictions in various states, as well as court rulings that have invalidated long-standing gun laws. These developments have resulted in numerous appeals to the Supreme Court, seeking clarification on the implications of the 2022 ruling.
Justice Clarence Thomas, alongside Justices Samuel Alito and Neil Gorsuch, expressed a desire to hear the Maryland case. In his dissenting opinion, Thomas argued that the Maryland law likely conflicts with the 2022 ruling, questioning the legality of the state's categorical prohibition on AR-15s. He remarked, “It is difficult to see how Maryland's categorical prohibition on AR-15s passes muster under this framework.”
The Maryland law, which prohibits what the state classifies as “assault weapons” similar to military-grade firearms like the M16, was enacted in 2013 following the tragic Sandy Hook school shooting that claimed the lives of 20 children and six adults. This law was upheld by the 4th Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals before the Supreme Court's expansion of gun rights in 2022. Following an appeal, the court instructed the appeals court to reassess the issue, which it did, reaching the same conclusion in an August 2024 ruling.
The court determined that the assault weapons in question do not fall within the protections of the Second Amendment because they are designed for sustained combat operations, making them ill-suited for personal self-defense needs. Meanwhile, the Rhode Island law, which was enacted shortly before the Supreme Court's 2022 ruling, restricts individuals from possessing magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. This law has been upheld by lower courts, including the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, despite challenges from four gun owners and a firearms retailer, Big Bear Hunting and Fishing Supply.
As the legal battles over gun rights continue, the Supreme Court's decision to decline hearing these significant cases maintains the status quo for Maryland and Rhode Island's gun laws. However, with ongoing litigation and the court's recent rulings, the future of assault weapons legislation remains uncertain, setting the stage for potential changes in the interpretation of the Second Amendment in the coming years.
