US Supreme Court Sidesteps Landmark Gun Control Challenge, Leaving State Bans Intact

Under Section 107 of the Copyright Act 1976, allowance is made for "fair use" for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching, scholarship, and research. Fair use is a use permitted by copyright statutes that might otherwise be infringing. Non-profit, educational, or personal use tips the balance in favor of fair use.

In a pivotal moment for America’s ever-evolving gun rights landscape, the U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to hear two major appeals that challenged the constitutionality of state-level bans on assault-style weapons and high-capacity ammunition magazines. The court’s refusal to intervene allows Maryland and Rhode Island laws—aimed at curbing firearm violence—to remain in effect, for now halting efforts by gun rights advocates to further expand Second Amendment protections.
What Happened and When?On June 2, 2025, the Supreme Court opted not to review two cases involving gun control measures: Maryland’s 2013 ban on military-style semiautomatic rifles and Rhode Island’s 2022 restriction on ammunition-feeding devices holding more than 10 rounds. Both statutes were previously upheld by their respective federal appeals courts—the 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for Maryland and the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for Rhode Island.
Why It MattersThe decision marks a critical moment in the ongoing legal tug-of-war between gun rights proponents and advocates of firearm regulation. The Supreme Court’s conservative majority, bolstered in recent years by landmark rulings in 2008, 2010, and most notably 2022, has generally taken a broad interpretation of the Second Amendment. However, its current reticence to take up these challenges suggests a more cautious approach amid a divided public and complex lower court rulings.
Gun rights groups had argued that the banned rifles and magazines are in “common use” among law-abiding citizens and thus should be shielded by the Constitution. They also contended that the term “assault weapon” is a politically motivated misnomer intended to confuse the public.
Conversely, the appellate courts maintained that such weapons, designed for sustained military-style combat, pose outsized dangers in civilian contexts and are ill-suited for self-defense. Maryland's law, introduced in the wake of the 2012 Sandy Hook tragedy, carries up to three years of prison time for violations. Rhode Island’s law describes high-capacity magazines as particularly lethal in mass shooting incidents, with pauses in reloading potentially giving victims a chance to flee or intervene.
The court’s recent track record on gun rights, however, suggests that future challenges are inevitable. In 2022, the justices invalidated a New York law requiring special permits for carrying firearms in public. More recently, they ruled in favor of federal regulation of “ghost guns” but struck down the ban on bump stocks.
What Comes Next?Legal observers anticipate that the Supreme Court will eventually take up another gun rights case to clarify its 2022 precedent, which emphasized that gun restrictions must align with the “nation’s historical tradition” of firearm regulation.
In the meantime, states like Maryland and Rhode Island will continue to enforce their gun control laws, bolstered by Monday’s development. But with the nation’s highest court choosing restraint for now, the debate over where the balance lies between individual rights and public safety remains very much alive.

Видео US Supreme Court Sidesteps Landmark Gun Control Challenge, Leaving State Bans Intact канала PNP world