In 2024, during his re-election campaign, President Donald Trump promised the NRA that “no one will lay a finger on [their] firearms” should he return to the Oval Office. Now, five months into his second term, it’s clear Trump intends to honor his promise, even as gun violence rates continue to soar in the US.
Gun safety measures have been one of the many casualties of Trump’s abrupt and expansive cuts to government-funded agencies. The Trump administration has rescinded millions of dollars in grants to gun violence prevention centers across the US, cutting programs like that took years for previous administrations to build.
On May 16, Trump took his pro-Second Amendment agenda to previously unseen heights by legalizing forced reset triggers. These devices, which allow standard guns to operate similar to machine guns, exponentially increase a gun’s firing rate and, many believe, make it easier for gun owners to perpetrate mass shootings.
Anti-violence organizations warn that Trump’s sweeping reversal of gun safety measures could result in more gun-related deaths, exacerbating what experts call one of America’s deadliest public health crises. Pro-NRA activists, however, celebrate the increased freedom Trump’s actions afford them, commending the president for upholding their constitutional right to bear arms. But as Trump dismantles gun safety across the board, some of the country’s most influential legislators refuse to stand by the president’s deregulation?
A June 2 decision by the US Supreme Court seems to suggest otherwise. After the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting, Maryland instituted a statewide ban on assault rifles like the AR-15, the Sandy Hook gunman’s primary weapon. A Maryland resident, backed by three pro-gun organizations, sued the state on the grounds of a Second Amendment violation. The case made its way to the United States Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, where a 9-5 majority decision upheld Maryland’s ban. A final appeal brought the case to the Supreme Court, where four of the nine justices would have needed to vote to hear it. Three conservatives cast affirmative votes, but a fourth, Justice Brett Kavanaugh, declined to hear the Second Amendment challenge.
According to Kavanaugh’s official statement on the case, the Supreme Court “should and presumably will address the AR–15 issue soon.” But while the Supreme Court may agree to hear future gun rights cases, for the moment, its decision marks a sharp blow to Trump’s rampage against gun control. And for the Second Amendment at large, the decision reinforces one fact: not every gun is created equal.
The right to bear arms does not, for now, encompass the right to own a military-style assault weapon. Many Americans will breathe a sigh of relief. But some view this decision as further proof that the federal government is encroaching on their constitutional rights.
As America continues to grapple with the limitations of the Second Amendment, the Supreme Court’s decision points to a growing resistance to Trump’s pro-gun agenda, and an ever-evolving battle around one of America’s most controversial constitutional rights.