The right to bear arms

For most of American history the Supreme Court said little about what the Second Amendment meant. In United States v. Miller (1939), it declined to protect a sawed-off shotgun because nothing showed the weapon had a reasonable relationship to a well regulated militia. For decades that decision was read by many courts as tying the right to militia service.

That changed in District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), which struck down Washington, D.C.’s ban on handguns in the home. The Court held that the amendment protects an individual right unconnected to military service. Two years later, McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010) held that the right also limits state and local governments, through the Fourteenth Amendment.

In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), the Court struck down a New York rule that required a person to show a special need before getting a license to carry a concealed handgun in public. It also set the test courts must now use: when a law burdens conduct the amendment’s text covers, the government must show the law is consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.

In United States v. Rahimi (2024), the Court applied that test and upheld a federal law that bars people under certain domestic-violence restraining orders from having firearms. The Court said the amendment does not stop the government from disarming people who pose a credible threat to others. Courts are still working out how far the historical test reaches, so the law in this area continues to develop.