Supreme Court Issues Overwhelming 8-1 Decision on Second Amendment Preservation Act

The state of Missouri passed the Second Amendment Preservation Act in 2021 to ensure its residents could keep their guns, no matter what the federal government decides. The federal government sued the state for doing so, and the case made its way to the Supreme Court. Finally, a decision has been made, but it’s still not clear exactly what will happen next. 

In other words, even if the federal government moves to adjust or tighten restrictions on the right to bear arms, as was dictated in the Second Amendment, the authorities in Missouri will not enforce these regulations. 

One of the groups that have been banned from owning a firearm under the act is those who have committed a felony. Anyone who has been found to have violated this ban can expect to receive a fine of up to $50,000.

The Second Amendment states that every American has the right to arm themselves and that the government has no right to breach or violate this right. It was essentially done so every American citizen can defend themselves in the event of any threats.

And that none of their law enforcement agents will abide by or enforce such regulations: “No public officer or employee of this state shall have any authority to enforce or attempt to enforce any of the infringements on the right to keep and bear arms.”

Which is, in many ways, absolutely accurate. According to the Constitution of the United States, power is distributed between the federal and state governments. As James Madison explained, “The powers reserved to the several States will extend to all the objects which, in the ordinary course of affairs, concern the lives, liberties and properties of the people, and the internal order, improvement and prosperity of the State.”

The lawsuit against the state of Missouri challenged its right to block the federal government’s current or future legislation regarding the right to bear arms. 

Judge Wimes argued that the act “violates the Constitution’s supremacy clause, which makes clear that state laws cannot invalidate federal laws, and that federal laws trump any inconsistent state laws.”

What the state can do is express its opinions on the Second Amendment, and  can prohibit state and local officials from enforcing federal law. This is why the federal courts were angry with Missouri state officials, as they had done the very thing they aren’t allowed to do.

In October 2023, the Supreme Court finally released its ruling: They agreed that the district court was right in banning Missouri’s law as it was unconstitutional. But again, Missouri appealed the decision through the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals and headed back to the courtroom. 

This raises questions about the relationship between citizens and politicians and their communication. It also suggests that politicians and policy makers should consult with citizens, or at least make them aware of any possible changes that are coming into practice, to prevent them from being innocently caught out.

However, what the majority of the respondents also said was they believe the act will increase the amount of gun murders, suicides, and theft in the state. This gives further reason as to why citizens should be involved in the consultations of policy making.

However, after both arguments were heard, it was eight against one in favor of the federal government. Missouri will not be allowed to bar current or any future federal restrictions regarding gun rights within state borders as they agreed it was unconstitutional to do so. Well-known Justice Clarence Thomas, a staunch Republican, was the only one to side with Missouri.

The Supreme Court decided to reverse the dismissal of this case, due to the “proper cause” of the case from New York violating the Fourteenth Amendment. This was because it prevented law-abiding citizens with self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to carry firearms.

Despite this, over half of Americans believe that there should be some restrictions on people’s access to guns. 56% say there should be a ban on carrying handguns in public places, and 61% say people shouldn’t be allowed to own assault and semi-automatic weapons. 90% also believe registration and background checks should be completed before someone is allowed to buy and own a gun.

But despite the hundreds of mass shootings that happen in the US, it is never as simple as just banning guns. As the right to carry firearms has been written into the Second Amendment, and with there being such a political divide on what should be done about it, gun control is still something that is often up for debate.

The current U.S. President Joe Biden, has already passed a law which, in his and his supporters’ opinion, increases gun safety. Though to gun rights activists, it’s a direct infringement upon their Constitutional rights. 

Now, because of the ruling from the Supreme Court regarding the Second Amendment Preservation Act of Missouri, this legislation will be enforced in all 50 states, as will any other law the current or future president passes. 

One X user said in reply to the news of the ruling, “”We the people” do not require a Supreme Court decision, nor do we care how any leftist, liberal, globalist or democrat feels about our constitutional rights… they are non negotiable.”

The study also found that in terms of people who don’t currently own a gun, 60% of Republicans and 40% of Democrats said they would consider buying one. Both sides of the political spectrum are also different when it comes to safety. 79% of Republicans say owning a gun increases safety, whereas 78% of Democrats say it reduces safety.

If President Biden remains in the Oval Office, he may very well decide to institute stricter gun laws over the next four years. But if former president Donald Trump wins the race, it’s likely that no new gun laws will be passed. And he could even overturn Biden’s licensing legislation. 

But Biden is not finished. He wants to place a ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, claiming that neither of these policies violates the Second Amendment. This promise was made in 2020; however, Congress is not on his side with this.

He told the National Rifle Association that the Biden administration will come for their guns and that he wants to protect their Second Amendment rights. He also said that on his first day as President, he would fire American lawyer Steve Dettelbach from his role as the Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, as he is anti-guns.

It’s about states’ rights, or in this case, lack thereof. Missouri Solicitor General Joshua Divine explained, “If the United States may sue any State or state official who expresses a contested view of the Constitution, then law professors, state lawyers and all government officials have cause for serious concern.”