Chief Justice John Roberts, alongside Justices Brett Kavanaugh and Amy Coney Barrett, just made a move that is certain to spark debate across America. Their surprising alignment with liberal justices has many conservatives questioning what’s next for gun rights in the United States.
The Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear a challenge to Maryland’s “assault weapons” ban, leaving the law—and similar bans in eight other states—intact. According to Breitbart News, the high court’s refusal means the August 2024 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit, which upheld Maryland’s ban, remains in effect.
This decision drew immediate attention because Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barrett joined the court’s three liberal justices in rejecting the case. Meanwhile, Justices Neil Gorsuch, Samuel Alito, and Clarence Thomas openly voiced their disagreement, signaling a deep divide within the Court on Second Amendment rights.
For many conservatives, the most shocking development was the decision of Roberts, Kavanaugh, and Barrett to side with the liberal bloc. These justices have often been seen as reliable defenders of constitutional gun rights, making their refusal to take up the challenge particularly noteworthy.
Justice Kavanaugh, while siding with the majority, issued a statement clarifying his view. He emphasized the widespread ownership and legality of the AR-15 rifle, the primary firearm implicated in Maryland’s ban. Kavanaugh wrote, “This case primarily concerns Maryland’s ban on the AR–15, a semi-automatic rifle. Americans today possess an estimated 20 to 30 million AR–15s. And AR–15s are legal in 41 of the 50 States, meaning that the States such as Maryland that prohibit AR–15s are something of an outlier.”
His statement also acknowledged the petitioners’ “strong argument that AR–15s are in ‘common use’ by law-abiding citizens and therefore are protected by the Second Amendment under Heller.” Despite this, he ultimately agreed with the decision not to hear the case, frustrating many gun rights supporters.
Justice Thomas went further, expressing his disappointment with the Court’s inaction. He warned that by refusing to decide on this matter now, the Supreme Court risks allowing more restrictive federal measures in the future.
Gun owners and Second Amendment advocates reacted swiftly, warning that the Supreme Court’s refusal to intervene could embolden lawmakers to pursue even stricter gun control measures. With bans remaining in place in states like California, New York, and Illinois, critics argue that the Court missed an opportunity to clarify the constitutional limits on state power.
Breitbart News noted that Justices Alito, Gorsuch, and Thomas would have taken the case, highlighting the ideological split. Thomas noted, “I would not wait to decide whether the government can ban the most popular rifle in America. We have avoided deciding it for a full decade.”
Many see the Maryland law as a test case for broader state and federal gun restrictions. Critics argue that Maryland’s ban targets commonly owned firearms by law-abiding citizens, directly challenging Supreme Court precedents like Heller, which affirmed the right to keep arms “in common use.”
Supporters of the ban, however, contend it is a necessary step to curb gun violence and prevent mass shootings. They argue that states should have the authority to pass laws tailored to public safety, even if it means restricting certain types of firearms.
The high court’s decision leaves the door open for future legal battles over firearms. Justice Thomas warned that deferring action could allow for “more egregious ban[s] at the federal level,” suggesting that the issue is far from settled.
The fact that AR-15s remain legal in 41 states but banned in nine highlights the patchwork nature of gun laws across the country. Kavanaugh’s own words acknowledged this divide, noting that Maryland is an “outlier” in its sweeping prohibition.
The Associated Press reported that Gorsuch, Alito, and Thomas “publicly noted their disagreement” with the majority’s refusal, indicating that the gun rights debate will continue to be a source of friction within the Supreme Court. As more cases work their way through the lower courts, pressure is likely to mount for a definitive ruling on the scope of the Second Amendment.
Observers point to the unusual coalition of justices as evidence that the Court remains unpredictable on hot-button issues. With President Donald Trump in office, many conservatives expected a stronger defense of gun rights from the bench.
