The gun rights movement has been optimistic since the Supreme Court issued its 2022 NYSRPA v. Bruen ruling. This case shot down the state of New York’s “may issue” concealed carry licensing laws that enabled the government to decide who was fit to exercise their Second Amendment rights. The case also struck a blow to the tiers of scrutiny method that so many lower courts rely on when deciding gun rights cases. The court ruled that the nation’s historical laws and traditions dealing with firearms — that existed at the time of the founding — are what is to guide court opinion when deciding if a gun law is constitutional, not interest balancing tests that weigh public safety concerns against constitutionally protected rights. This ruling also reaffirmed the 2008 Heller decision which stated that commonly owned firearms used for lawful purposes, cannot be banned. The gun rights movement was ecstatic, believing this ruling struck the final blow against all gun control. There were very few laws against the ownership of arms at the time of the founding. Gun control then, should be dead in the water. What happened instead was a doubling down of gun control efforts, with many states snubbing their noses at the Supreme Court and passing very restrictive laws banning the AR-15 and other commonly owned semi-automatic rifles. The state of Illinois not only passed laws banning so-called assault weapons, they also instituted a registration law that required all residents to register their weapons with the state. While a federal judge has found Illinois’ law to be unconstitutional, the law was stayed by an appeals court judge. Many of these cases have been sent to the Supreme Court for review, and it is hoped that they will set the record straight once and for all.
Unfortunately, The Supreme Court has yet to grant any of the pending gun ban cases certiorari. It isn’t uncommon for the court to deny a case if they haven’t received a final judgment. The assault weapon bans from Illinois and Maryland are good examples. Gun rights groups appealed to the Supreme Court for emergency review and were denied because they did not go through the entire process. In August 2024, the case from Maryland — Snope v. Brown — received final judgment and was found to be constitutional by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. Once again, this case was sent to SCOTUS for review and is still pending. There are currently four Second Amendment cases before the court. Snope v. Brown, which is Maryland’s assault weapon ban case. Ocean State Tactical v. Rhode Island, which deals with a ban on high-capacity magazines. Gray V. Jennings, which is an assault weapon ban from Delaware, and Maryland Shall Issue v. Wes Moore, which deals with Maryland’s licensing qualification requirements to purchase a handgun. All of these cases have reached the final judgment phase and are waiting to be heard.
Gun rights groups and popular YouTubers like Mark Smith, of The Four Boxes Diner, have expressed their beliefs that the court would promptly take these cases and we would win them hands down. There are plenty of reasons to be optimistic, as the court’s previous rulings seem to indicate that they are ready and willing, to defend the Second Amendment. The court is hesitating, however, as they don’t seem interested in hearing any of them. In fact, on January 10th, 2025, they were conferenced and denied certiorari. It is possible, as Mark Smith argues, that they could be rescheduled for conference at a later date, and that they could still be heard before the end of the term. Smith argued that the court scheduled all of these cases at the same time because it was possible they were going to tackle them all together. This doesn’t appear to be what is happening. If the court, in this writer’s humble opinion, was interested in defending its previous rulings and ending these bans, these cases would have been prioritized. Mark Smith’s opinion shouldn’t be taken lightly, he is a constitutional scholar and an attorney who is very knowledgeable about these issues. Even his levels of optimism are waning, however, as it seems the court keeps pushing this issue further down the road. There are many cases to be heard before June, meaning that there may be little room to take on four more. In the meantime, people are being deprived of their rights.
Why is the Second Amendment so important? Without it, none of the other rights have any teeth. It is the one thing we have that protects human dignity by enabling us to be the masters of our own lives. How free are we when the government passes laws that do little more than empower the criminal who will not follow them? If you are forced to wait on another individual to save you, instead of being able to stand your ground and fight for yourself, you are not free. Your ability to survive now rests in the hands of the government that disarmed you in the first place. A government mind you, that SCOTUS has ruled more than once, is under no obligation to risk their lives for you. Gun control leaves the law-abiding citizen, who is not inclined to harm another human being, vulnerable to those who simply do not care. It seems like such a simple argument, yet we are constantly bombarded by calls for gun control every time a crazy person proves this to be the case by shooting up a designated gun-free zone. It is now a well-known fact that the assault weapon ban that ran from 1994 to 2004 did next to nothing to stop violent acts committed with firearms. The bottom line is that people who are motivated to commit violence against another will do so no matter what laws stand in their way. It is an unfortunate reality that many people do not want to face, but the only way to deal with violence is to be prepared to be more violent. Once a violent act is initiated, you will either fight back or be a victim. By the time the police arrive, it could be too late.
In 2022, The Supreme Court inspired hope that gun control was a sitting duck. There are very few laws dating back to the founding, if any at all, that limit the types of firearms that could be owned. If the court were to follow its rulings and guidelines set in place by the NYSRPA v. Bruen decision, the current gun ban cases would be easy wins for the gun rights movement. For whatever reasons that remain unknown, the court has failed to grant certiorari to any of the pending cases. This means that people in these states will continue to be deprived of their rights despite the court’s previous rulings. These bans are not stopping criminals from acquiring firearms, or using them to commit crimes. If the court fails to grant cert to these cases during this term, there is a possibility they could be heard later, when there are fewer gun-friendly judges on the court. Other states are likely to be empowered to pursue gun bans of their own while the court twiddles their thumbs. Colorado, for example, has just introduced a bill that bans any firearm with a detachable magazine. At a time when many people have high hopes and aspirations about the Second Amendment, the future remains bleak as long as the court continues to kick these issues down the road. Even if they do grant cert this term, there is no guarantee that they would rule in our favor.
For more articles on the Second Amendment, the psychology of persuasion and propaganda, and Critical Race Theory, visit my website at www.defenseofournation.com.
