Firearm case law decisions are numerous in the history of the United States. While many deal with Second Amendment issues, many others deal with other issues of the constitution. The Second Amendment to the United States Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. It states that: // Legal Topics Primary Organizations Liberty Belles Prominent individuals Advocates of firearms Gary Kleck Charlton Heston Wayne LaPierre John Lott Ted Nugent Advocates of firearms control Darrell Scotts Congressoinal Speech Michael D. Barnes Michael Bellesiles James Brady Sarah Brady Tom Diaz Arthur Kellermann Michael Moore (Bowling for Columbine) Josh Sugarmann... The Federal Assault Weapons Ban (AWB) was a provision of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994, a federal law of the United States that included a prohibition on the sale of semi-automatic assault weapons manufactured after the date of the bans enactment. ... ATF (BATFE) Seal The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (officially ATF[1], less frequently BATF or BATFE) is a United States federal agency; more specifically a specialized law enforcement and regulatory organization within the United States Department of Justice. ... The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, also known as the Brady Bill, was passed by the United States Congress, signed into law by President Bill Clinton on November 30, 1993, and went into effect on February 28, 1994. ... // A Federal Firearms License, or FFL, is a license that enables an individual or a company to engage in a business that pertains to the production of firearms and ammunitions or the interstate and intrastate sale of firearms. ... Firearm case law are numerous in United States history. ... The Firearm Owners Protection Act (FOPA) is a United States federal law that revised many statutes in the Gun Control Act of 1968. ... The Gun Control Act of 1968, Pub. ... Many US states have legislated gun (firearm) laws, independent of existing federal firearms laws. ... Gun politics in the United States is a contentious topic in the United States. ... The National Firearms Act (NFA), cited as the Act of June 26, 1934, Ch. ... Amendment II (the Second Amendment) of the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, declares the necessity for a well regulated militia, and prohibits infringement of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. ... A straw purchase is a situation in which a buyer uses an intermediary (a straw purchaser) through which to acquire one or more firearms from a licensed firearms dealer. ... The Sullivan Act is a controversial gun control law in New York City. ... The Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act (1994) is a piece of legislation, passed by the US Congress, which expanded Federal law in several ways. ... Amendment II (the Second Amendment) of the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, declares the necessity for a well regulated militia, and prohibits infringement of the right of the people to keep and bear arms. ... The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States of America. ... Image of the United States Bill of Rights from the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration. ...

A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.

The interpretation of the Second Amendment has only been addressed by the Supreme Court on a relatively narrow scope, and seldom. However, the Amendment has more commonly been addressed by lower courts, often with conflicting results. New interpretations of the Second Amendment would especially begin to gain strength some 150 years after its writing, or around the 1940s. From the adoption of the Bill of Rights in 1791 until 1905, the United States courts strictly interpreted the Second Amendment as an individual right. ^{[citation needed]} In 1905, the Kansas Supreme Court in Salina v. Blaksley [1] made the first collective right interpretation, despite the U.S. Supreme Court's Presser v. Illinois ruling otherwise in 1886. Scholarly analysis of the context of the Second Amendment has begun to reverse the Salina viewpoint, and brings the interpretation more in line with the time of its conception ([2],[3], [4]). One key arguments given is, it is unreasonable to believe The People mentioned in the Second Amendment should fundamentally be different from The People in other parts of the Bill of Rights. It is generally described as containing a declaration of the rights of individuals, not groups. However, there remains much conflict as to the proper interpretaion within the courts, largely because the Supreme Court has always refused, and continues to refuse, to hear a case where the central issue is interpreting individual v collective rights within the context of the Second Amendment and the rest of the Bill of Rights. Lexington Minuteman representing militia minuteman John Parker A militia is the activity of one or more citizens organized to provide defense or paramilitary service, or those engaged in such activity. ... Look up freedom in Wiktionary, the free dictionary. ... A state is a set of institutions that possesses the exclusive legitimate authority to make the rules that govern the people in one or more societies, having internal and external sovereignty over a definite territory. ... This article does not cite its references or sources. ... The supreme court in some countries, provinces, and states, functions as a court of last resort whose rulings cannot be challenged. ... 1791 (MDCCXCI) was a common year starting on Saturday (see link for calendar) of the Gregorian calendar (or a common year starting on Tuesday of the 11-day-slower Julian calendar). ... 1905 (MCMV) was a common year starting on Sunday (see link for calendar). ...

Supreme Court cases

Supreme Court cases relating directly with the Second Amendment

• United States v. Miller (1939) [5] - The only Supreme Court case which was directly related to the issues of the Second Amendment at the heart of the case. The court stated in part:

  "In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a 'shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length' at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment or that its use could contribute to the common defense... The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. 'A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.' And further, that ordinarily when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time."

United States v. ... 1939 (MCMXXXIX) was a common year starting on Sunday (link will take you to calendar). ...

Supreme Court cases mentioning the Second Amendment

• Dred Scott v. Sandford (1857) [6] - The court ruled Scott did not enjoy the protection of the Bill of Rights because of his racial background. However, in its ruling, it implies all free men do have the right to bear arms by indicating what would happen if he was indeed afforded full protection:

  "It would give to persons of the negro race, ... the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, ... the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went."

• United States v. Cruikshank (1876) [7] - A post Civil War era case relating to the Ku Klux Klan depriving freed slaves basic rights such as freedom of assembly and to bear arms. The court ruled the First and Second Amendments "was not intended to limit the powers of the State governments in respect to their own citizens" and "has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the national government," respectively. In summary, it ruled individuals could not file charges against other citizens in federal court regarding violations of their constitutional rights. It was up to the states to protect the fundamental rights of its citizens when their rights were abridged by other citizens.
• Presser v. Illinois (1886), [8] - One of only two post-Civil War 19th Century U.S. Supreme Court cases to address the Second amendment, the sole other one being the above-mentioned U.S. v. Cruikshank. This second post-Civil War era case related to the meaning of the Second Amendment rights relating to militias and individuals. The court ruled the Second Amendment right was a right of individuals, not militias, and was not a right to form or belong to a militia, but related to an individual right to bear arms for the good of the United States, who could serve as members of a militia upon being called up by the Government in time of collective need. In essence, it declared, although individuals have the right to keep and bear arms, a state law prohibiting common citizens from forming personal military organizations, and drilling or parading, is still constitutional because prohibiting such personal military formations and parades does not limit a personal right to keep and bear arms:

  "We think it clear that the sections under consideration, which only forbid bodies of men to associate together as military organizations, or to drill or parade with arms in cities and towns unless authorized by law, do not infringe the right of the people to keep and bear arms."

• Duncan v. Louisiana (1968) [9] - A Supreme Court case which incorporated the Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial at the state level as required by the Fourteenth Amendment. In the court's written opinion, the court used a statement by Senator Howard, who introduced the Fourteenth Amendment, to help validate their ruling that the Bill of Rights as a result of the Fourteenth Amendment forces states, and not just the federal government, to protect the same individual rights enumerated in the Bill of Rights:

  "Such is the character of the privileges and immunities spoken of in the second section of the fourth article of the Constitution ...the personal rights guarantied and secured by the first eight amendments of the Constitution; such as the freedom of speech and of the press; the right of the people peaceably to assemble and petition the Government for a redress of grievances, a right appertaining [391 U.S. 145, 167] to each and all the people; the right to keep and to bear arms..."

• Lewis v. United States (1980) [10] - Ruling Congress may prohibit felons from possessing firearms:

  "This Court has recognized repeatedly that a legislature constitutionally may prohibit a convicted felon from engaging in activities far more fundamental than the possession of a firearm."

• U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez (1990) A case dealing with nonresident aliens and the Fourth Amendment, but led to a discussion of who are "the People" when referred to in the Constitution:

  "[T]he people' seems to have been a term of art employed in select parts of the Constitution. The Preamble declares that the Constitution is ordained and established by 'the people of the United States.' The Second Amendment protects 'the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,' and the Ninth and Tenth Amendments provide that certain rights and powers are retained by and reserved to 'the people.' See also U.S. Const., Amdt. 1 ('Congress shall make no law . . . abridging . . . the right of the people peaceably to assemble') (emphasis added); Art. I, 2, cl. 1 ('The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the people of the several States') (emphasis added). While this textual exegesis is by no means conclusive, it suggests that 'the people' protected by the Fourth Amendment, and by the First and Second Amendments, and to whom rights and powers are reserved in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, refers to a class of persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with this country to be considered part of that community. "

Holding Africans residing in America, whether slaves or free, could not become United States citizens and the plaintiff therefore lacked the capacity to file a lawsuit. ... 1857 was a common year starting on Thursday (see link for calendar). ... United States v. ... 1876 (MDCCCLXXVI) was a leap year starting on Saturday. ... 1886 (MDCCCLXXXVI) is a common year starting on Friday (click on link to calendar) // Events January 18 - Modern field hockey is born with the formation of The Hockey Association in England. ... United States v. ... Holding By a 7-2 majority the Supreme Court ruled in favor of Duncan, arguing that the right to a jury trial in criminal cases was fundamental and central to the American conception of justice. ... 1968 (MCMLXVIII) was a leap year starting on Monday (the link is to a full 1968 calendar). ... Amendment VI (the Sixth Amendment) of the United States Constitution codifies rights related to criminal prosecutions in federal courts. ... The Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution is one of the post-Civil War amendments and it includes the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses. ... 1980 (MCMLXXX) was a leap year starting on Tuesday. ... Holding --- Court membership Case opinions Laws applied --- United States v. ... This article is about the year. ...

Circuit Court cases relating directly to the Second Amendment

The Second Amendment currently applies to individual rights in certain State jurisdictions, while not in others.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

• United States v. Emerson (2001) [11] - Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling the Second Amendment does apply to individual rights, not to collective rights, to bear arms. The court partly stated:

  "There is no evidence in the text of the Second Amendment, or any other part of the Constitution, that the words 'the people' have a different connotation within the Second Amendment than when employed elsewhere in the Constitution."

  We hold . . . that it protects the rights of individuals, including those not . . . actually a member of any militia or engaged in active military service or training, to privately possess and bear their own firearms . . . that are suitable as personal, individual weapons."

United States v. ... This article is about the year 2001. ... The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the following United States District Courts: Western, Middle, and Eastern Districts of Louisiana Northern and Southern Districts of Mississippi Western, Eastern, Northern and Southern Districts of Texas The court is based at...

Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals

• Silveira v. Lockyer (2002) [12] - Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling the Second Amendment does not apply to individual rights:

  "Because the Second Amendment does not confer an individual right to own or possess arms, we affirm the dismissal of all claims brought pursuant to that constitutional provision."

Silveira v. ... For album titles with the same name, see 2002 (album). ... The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the following United States district courts: District of Alaska District of Arizona Central, Eastern, Northern, and Southern Districts of California District of Guam District of Hawaii District of Idaho District of Montana...

Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals

• United States v. Haney (2001) [13] - Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling the Second Amendment only applies to a well regulated militia, not to individuals. In this case, Mr. Haney constructed two machine guns and voluntarily turned himself into the police and allowed a search of his premises in order to challenge the machine gun ban 922(o) on Second Amendment constitutional grounds. However, his circuit court ruled:

  "we hold that a federal criminal gun-control law does not violate the Second Amendment unless it impairs the state's ability to maintain a well-regulated militia. This is simply a straightforward reading of the text of the Second Amendment."

• United States v. Baer (2000) [14] - Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals rejected a "time-worn" Second Amendment challenge to the federal felon-in-possession law, noting:

  "the circuits have consistently upheld the constitutionality of federal weapons regulations like [this one] absent evidence that they in any way affect the maintenance of a well regulated militia."

• United States v. Oakes (1977) [15] - Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals court ruled:

  "we rejected a Second Amendment challenge to the federal law criminalizing possession of an unregistered machinegun, 26 U.S.C. § 5861(d). We found no evidence that the firearm in question was connected with a militia, even though the defendant was nominally a member of the Kansas militia and the "Posse Comitatus," a militia-type organization registered with the state..."

This article is about the year 2001. ... The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the following United States district courts: District of Colorado District of Kansas District of New Mexico Eastern, Northern, and Western Districts of Oklahoma District of Utah District of Wyoming These districts were... This article is about the year 2000. ... The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the following United States district courts: District of Colorado District of Kansas District of New Mexico Eastern, Northern, and Western Districts of Oklahoma District of Utah District of Wyoming These districts were... For the album by Ash, see 1977 (album). ... The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the following United States district courts: District of Colorado District of Kansas District of New Mexico Eastern, Northern, and Western Districts of Oklahoma District of Utah District of Wyoming These districts were...

State Supreme Court rulings

• Salina v. Blaksley (1905) [16] - Kansas Supreme Court, with very little to no historical context study, made the first ruling in U.S. history to re-interpret the Second Amendment. It ruled the Bill of Rights provisions only applied to members of an organized militia or members of the military. Its final line concludes:

  "The defendant was not a member of an organized militia, nor of any other military organization provided for by law, and was therefore not within the provision of the Bill of Rights, and was not protected by its terms."

1905 (MCMV) was a common year starting on Sunday (see link for calendar). ...

Court rulings relating to the 1986 Gun Owners Protection Act

• Farmer v. Higgins (1990) [17] - Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals ruling the ATF does not need to register new machineguns for private ownership under the exception of 18 USC 922(o)(A)(1).
• United States v. Warner (1993) [18] - Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling regarding Mr. Warner, who was caught in Utah with a machine gun and convicted on 922(o), possession of a machine gun. Mr. Warner appealed on the basis the Utah constitution allows its citizens to bear arms, and therefore he is exempt based on 922(o)(2)(A), "under authority of the State." However, the court overruled this, citing the Farmer case saying machine guns were not meant to be in private hands, and although the Utah law gives permission to own automatic firearms, it did not grant him authority.
• United States v. Rock Island Armory (1991) [19] - United States District Court ruling one cannot be prosecuted for 1934 National Firearms Act violations for machineguns produced after 1986:

  "...since enactment of 18 U.S.C. § 922(o), the Secretary has refused to accept any tax payments to make or transfer a machinegun made after May 19, 1986, to approve any such making or transfer, or to register any such machinegun. As applied to machineguns made and possessed after May 19, 1986, the registration and other requirements of the National Firearms Act, Chapter 53 of the Internal Revenue Code, no longer serve any revenue purpose, and are impliedly repealed or are unconstitutional."

This article is about the year. ... The United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the following United States district courts: Northern, Middle, and Southern Districts of Alabama Northern, Middle, and Southern Districts of Florida Northern, Middle, and Southern Districts of Georgia These districts were originally part... 1993 (MCMXCIII) was a common year starting on Friday of the Gregorian calendar and marked the Beginning of the International Decade to Combat Racism and Racial Discrimination (1993-2003). ... The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the following United States district courts: District of Colorado District of Kansas District of New Mexico Eastern, Northern, and Western Districts of Oklahoma District of Utah District of Wyoming These districts were... 1991 (MCMXCI) was a common year starting on Tuesday of the Gregorian calendar. ... The National Firearms Act (NFA), cited as the Act of June 26, 1934, Ch. ...

Firearm laws challenged on the Commerce Clause

• United States v. Lopez (1995) [20] - The first modern Supreme Court case to set limit on Congress' power under the Commerce Clause.
• United States v. Stewart (2005) [21] - A case regarding the legality of homemade machine guns. The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals had ruled the Federal government did not have power under the commerce clause to regulate possession of homemade machine guns: "...a homemade machinegun may be part of a gun collection or may be crafted as a hobby. Or it may be used for illegal purposes. Whatever its intended use, without some evidence that it will be sold or transferred—and there is none here—its relationship to interstate commerce is highly attenuated." However, citing the results of the Ashcroft v. Raich case (June 5, 2005), the Supreme Court decided not to hear the case but rather sent it back to the Circuit Court with guidance based on the Ashcroft v. Raich results, which effectively overturned the 9th Circuit. The ruling effectively said Congress can use the commerce clause to ban homemade or homegrown artifacts such as marijuana or machine guns, even though none of their components were ever, nor ever will be, transferred, sold, or involved in any sort of commerce transaction.
• United States v. Rybar (1996) [22] - A case nearly identical to Stewart, but preceding it by 9 years. In it, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Congress did have the power to regulate possession of homemade machine guns under the commerce clause, later contradicted by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in 2005, but ultimately reaffirmed by the Supreme Court. The Third Circuit Court of Appeals made this decision 2-1, with future Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito in dissent.

Holding Possession of a gun near a school is not an economic activity that has a substantial effect on interstate commerce. ... 1995 (MCMXCV) was a common year starting on Sunday of the Gregorian calendar. ... A congress is a gathering of people, especially a gathering for a political purpose. ... Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, known as the Commerce Clause, empowers the United States Congress To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes. ... United States v. ... 2005 (MMV) was a common year starting on Saturday of the Gregorian calendar. ... A machine gun is a fully-automatic firearm that is capable of firing bullets in rapid succession. ... Ashcroft v. ... June 5 is the 156th day of the year in the Gregorian calendar (157th in leap years), with 209 days remaining. ... 2005 (MMV) was a common year starting on Saturday of the Gregorian calendar. ... Ashcroft v. ... The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the following United States district courts: District of Alaska District of Arizona Central, Eastern, Northern, and Southern Districts of California District of Guam District of Hawaii District of Idaho District of Montana... Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, known as the Commerce Clause, empowers the United States Congress To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes. ... United States of America v. ... 1996 (MCMXCVI) was a leap year starting on Monday of the Gregorian calendar, and was designated the International Year for the Eradication of Poverty. ... The United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the district courts for the following districts: District of Delaware District of New Jersey Western, Middle, and Eastern Districts of Pennsylvania It also has appellate jurisdiction over the District Court of the... Article I, Section 8, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, known as the Commerce Clause, empowers the United States Congress To regulate Commerce with foreign Nations, and among the several States, and with the Indian Tribes. ... The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit is a federal court with appellate jurisdiction over the following United States district courts: District of Alaska District of Arizona Central, Eastern, Northern, and Southern Districts of California District of Guam District of Hawaii District of Idaho District of Montana... Samuel Anthony Alito, Jr. ... Dissent is a sentiment or philosophy of non-agreement or opposition to an idea (eg. ...

External links

• Arms and the law - A web site with review and analysis of firearm case law
• NRA list of firearm court cases
• Guncite - List of Supreme Court cases related to the Second Amendment on Guncite
• Supreme Court cases - Comprehensive list of Supreme Court cases which deal with firearms
• State Supreme Court cases - Comprehensive list of State Court cases which deal with firearms