Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

Bill of Rights

Second Amendment

Amendment II · Ratified December 15, 1791

In brief

Protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Amendment II · Ratified December 15, 1791 · Part of the Bill of Rights

How often courts cite this over time

1791185019001950200020262100ratifiedratified · 1791 · ratified
citing decisions per year

Court decisions citing this, by year.The marker is when it took effect. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

Landmark decisions

8 total
  • District of Columbia v. Heller · 554 U.S. 570 (2008)

    District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States. It ruled that the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms—unconnected with service in a militia—for traditionally lawful purposes such as self-defense within the home, and that the District of Columbia's handgun ban and requirement that lawfully owned rifles and shotguns be kept "unloaded and disassembled or bound by a trigger lock" violated this guarantee.

  • McDonald v. City of Chicago · 561 U.S. 742 (2010)

    McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (2010), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that found that the right of an individual to "keep and bear arms", as protected under the Second Amendment, is incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment and is thereby enforceable against the states. The decision cleared up the uncertainty left in the wake of District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) as to the scope of gun rights in regard to the states.

  • New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass'n v. Bruen · 597 U.S. 1 (2022)

    New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022), abbreviated NYSRPA v. Bruen and also known as Bruen or NYSRPA II (to distinguish it from the 2020 case), is a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court related to the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution. The case concerned the constitutionality of the 1911 Sullivan Act, a New York State law requiring applicants for a pistol concealed carry license to show "proper cause", or a special need distinguishable from that of the general public, in their application.

  • United States v. Rahimi · 602 U.S. 680 (2024)

    United States v. Rahimi, 602 U.S. 680 (2024), was a United States Supreme Court case regarding the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution and whether it empowers the government to prohibit firearm possession by a person with a civil domestic violence restraining order in the absence of a corresponding criminal domestic violence conviction or charge. It came from a 2023 decision by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals invalidating a federal law prohibiting individuals from possessing firearms while under a restraining order relating to domestic abuse.

  • United States v. Cruikshank · 92 U.S. 542 (1875)

    United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U.S. 542 (1876), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court, ruling that the U.S. Bill of Rights did not limit the power of private actors or state governments despite the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment. It reversed the federal criminal convictions for the civil rights violations committed in aid of anti-Reconstruction murders.

  • United States v. Miller · 307 U.S. 174 (1939)

    United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939), is a landmark decision of the Supreme Court of the United States that involved a Second Amendment to the United States Constitution challenge to the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA). The case is often cited in the ongoing American gun politics debate, as both sides claim that it supports their position.

  • United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez · 494 U.S. 259 (1990)

    United States v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1990), was a United States Supreme Court decision that determined that Fourth Amendment protections do not apply to searches and seizures by United States agents of property owned by a nonresident alien in a foreign country.

  • Dred Scott v. Sandford · 60 U.S. 393 (1856)

    Dred Scott v. Sandford, 60 U.S. (19 How.) 393 (1857), was a landmark decision of the United States Supreme Court that held that the United States Constitution did not extend American citizenship to people of black African descent, and therefore they could not enjoy the rights and privileges the Constitution conferred upon American citizens.