Justice Clarence Thomas has once again voiced his frustration with the Supreme Court, this time over its refusal to hear a case challenging Maryland’s controversial ban on AR-15 rifles. The conservative justice’s remarks have reignited a heated debate about Second Amendment rights and the role of the judiciary in protecting them.
According to the Washington Examiner, the Supreme Court on Monday declined to take up a petition from a pro-gun rights group seeking to overturn Maryland’s 2013 law banning various semiautomatic firearms, including the AR-15. The law, which labels these firearms as illegal “assault weapons,” was upheld by a lower appeals court in a 10-5 decision. The high court’s refusal to hear the case leaves the ban in place.
In a dissenting opinion, Thomas sharply criticized the court for what he sees as its negligence in addressing a critical constitutional issue. His remarks also targeted the appeals court for placing what he called an excessive burden on challengers of the Maryland law.
Thomas’s criticism of the Supreme Court’s decision was unflinching. He argued that the AR-15, one of the most popular firearms in the United States, deserves protection under the Second Amendment. For him, the court’s avoidance of the issue suggests a troubling inconsistency in how constitutional rights are upheld.
“I would not wait to decide whether the government can ban the most popular rifle in America,” Thomas wrote. “That question is of critical importance to tens of millions of law-abiding AR–15 owners throughout the country. We have avoided deciding it for a full decade.” He further argued that failing to address the matter relegates the Second Amendment to “a second-class right.”
Thomas also took issue with the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, which upheld Maryland’s ban. He criticized the court’s reasoning, stating that it unfairly shifted the burden of proof onto those challenging the law, rather than requiring Maryland to justify the legality of its prohibition.
Justice Samuel Alito and Justice Neil Gorsuch joined Thomas in dissenting from the decision to deny the petition. Justice Brett Kavanaugh, while not formally dissenting, also expressed concerns about the lower court’s ruling. In a statement, Kavanaugh made it clear that the Supreme Court’s refusal to take the case should not be interpreted as an endorsement of Maryland’s law.
“Opinions from other Courts of Appeals should assist this Court’s ultimate decision-making on the AR–15 issue,” Kavanaugh wrote. He suggested that similar petitions are likely to come before the court in the near future, and he expressed hope that the issue would be addressed “in the next Term or two.”
The Firearms Policy Coalition, the group that brought the challenge, echoed these frustrations. In a statement, the organization accused the Supreme Court of lacking the “judicial courage” to uphold the Constitution and vowed to continue fighting against bans on semiautomatic firearms.
The pro-gun movement has long argued that bans like Maryland’s unfairly target law-abiding gun owners and fail to address the root causes of gun violence. The Firearms Policy Coalition, in particular, views the AR-15 as a symbol of Second Amendment rights and has made it a focal point of its legal battles.
“Like millions of peaceable gun owners across the country, we are frustrated that the Court continues to allow lower courts to treat the Second Amendment as a second-class right,” the group said in its statement. Declaring their resolve to “eliminate these immoral bans,” they promised to return to the Supreme Court with similar cases in the future.
The group’s frustration highlights a broader concern among conservatives: that the judiciary has become too hesitant to defend gun rights. For activists, the AR-15 ban represents more than a single law—it is a test of whether courts will uphold their interpretation of the Second Amendment.
This is not the first time the Supreme Court has declined to take up a major gun rights case, but the justices’ recent rulings have suggested a willingness to revisit Second Amendment issues. In 2022, the court struck down a New York law restricting concealed carry permits, signaling a potential shift toward broader gun rights protections.
The Maryland case, however, reveals lingering divisions among the justices. While Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch appear eager to expand Second Amendment protections, others on the bench seem more cautious. Kavanaugh’s statement suggests that the court may be waiting for a more favorable case—or additional input from lower courts—before taking a definitive stance on AR-15 bans.
In the meantime, Maryland’s law will remain in effect, along with similar bans in other states. The Supreme Court also declined on Monday to hear a separate case challenging Rhode Island’s ban on high-capacity magazines, further frustrating gun rights advocates.
