Overview
The Second Amendment's interpretation has evolved from minimal judicial scrutiny to landmark Supreme Court decisions clarifying the scope and nature of the right to bear arms. Modern rulings define it as an individual right, apply it to states, and set standards for evaluating firearms regulations.
Early Judicial Interpretation
- The Supreme Court initially considered the Second Amendment as a limit only on federal, not state, power.
- Early twentieth-century cases suggested the right was tied to militia use of certain firearms.
- Legal scholars and lower courts disagreed on whether the Amendment protected individual or collective rights.
Debates Leading to Modern Era
- By the early twenty-first century, most U.S. Courts of Appeals viewed the Second Amendment as protecting a collective militia-related right.
- Some courts and commentators argued for an individual right to firearm possession outside militia activity.
District of Columbia v. Heller (2008)
- The Supreme Court held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess firearms for lawful purposes, including self-defense in the home.
- The ruling clarified that the right is not unlimited and does not invalidate regulations such as restrictions in sensitive places.
McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010)
- The Court ruled that the right to keep and bear arms is a fundamental right incorporated against the states through the Fourteenth Amendment.
Caetano v. Massachusetts (2016)
- The Court reiterated that the Second Amendment applies to the states and extends to arms not in existence at the nation's founding.
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022)
- The Supreme Court struck down New York's proper cause requirement for concealed handgun licenses.
- The decision recognized the right to bear arms extends outside the home.
- The Court established that Second Amendment challenges must be assessed based on constitutional text and historical tradition, not a two-step test.