The Supreme Court had a chance to stand up for the Second Amendment this week. Instead, it took a pass. Again.
On Monday, the justices declined to hear a case challenging Maryland’s ban on AR-15 ownership, effectively allowing the Fourth Circuit Court’s ruling upholding the ban to stand. For millions of gun owners who see the AR-15 as a symbol of freedom and a reliable tool for home defense, hunting, and sport shooting, this wasn’t just disappointing—it was baffling.
The case, Snope v. Brown, was ripe for resolution. Conservative Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, and Neil Gorsuch voted to take it up. But the usual suspects—Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Amy Coney Barrett and Brett Kavanaugh—joined the liberal wing in denying certiorari.
And just like that, the court’s opportunity to defend a core constitutional right slipped away once more.
Kavanaugh tried to soften the blow in a written statement, saying the denial of certiorari “does not mean that the Court agrees with a lower-court decision” and promising the issue would probably come up again in the next term or two. That’s a nice sentiment, but the problem is, constitutional rights shouldn’t have to wait in line for acknowledgment—especially ones as fundamental as the right to keep and bear arms.
As Kavanaugh himself pointed out, AR-15s are owned by an estimated 20 to 30 million Americans. They’re legal in 41 states. In short, they’re about as “in common use” as you can get—exactly the benchmark laid out by the Supreme Court in its landmark District of Columbia v. Heller decision in 2008.
So, what’s the holdup?
The Fourth Circuit’s ruling, penned by Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III (a Reagan appointee, no less), suggested that the AR-15 is a “military-style” weapon and thus outside the scope of Second Amendment protections. It’s a familiar talking point from the anti-gun left, but one that ignores both the facts and the law. The AR-15 operates like any other semi-automatic rifle: one trigger pull, one shot.
Justice Thomas, never one to mince words, put it plainly in his dissent: “I would not wait to decide whether the government can ban the most popular rifle in America.” He added that the Court had avoided the question for a decade—while millions of Americans are left in legal limbo.
Gun rights advocates aren’t just upset—they’re sounding the alarm. Adam Kraut, executive director of the Second Amendment Foundation, called the Court’s refusal to hear the case “an egregious error.” He warned that millions of Americans are being “disenfranchised” from exercising their full Second Amendment rights.
And the consequences could be far worse than just one state’s overreach. Thomas warned that if the Supreme Court continues to stay silent, a future administration could use ATF regulations to classify AR-15s—especially those with bump stocks or other modifications—as machine guns, banning them nationwide.
This isn’t hypothetical—it’s already happening. Bureaucratic rule-making is creeping closer to legislating by fiat, and courts are allowing it.
Why the so-called “conservative” justices like Roberts, Barrett, and even Kavanaugh refuse to address this growing threat to gun rights is a mystery—and a troubling one. The Constitution doesn’t protect rights when it’s convenient. It protects them always, especially when they’re under fire.
For millions of Americans who believe the Second Amendment means what it says, the time for answers is long overdue.