The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "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."
The Second Amendment, most often known as the right to bear arms, protects citizens’ right to possess firearms for lawful purposes. Therefore, if an individual satisfies state and federal firearm regulations, they have the right to own and carry a firearm. However, the Second Amendment allows the government to prevent prohibited people from accessing firearms such as minors or certain criminals. States have individual legislation guiding firearm ownership. Some states are stricter and require permits while other states have broad requirements and allow for more accessible gun ownership. For example, California requires individuals to obtain a license to conceal carry. On the other hand, Texas no longer requires a license to carry a handgun in most public places as of 2021.
Relevant Court Cases
In District of Columbia v. Heller, 478 F.3d 370 (2008), the Supreme Court held that an individual’s right to keep and carry a firearm for lawful purposes, such as self-defense, is protected by the history and tradition of the Second Amendment. However, the Court suggested that the Second Amendment would not prevent certain regulations prohibiting criminals and some individuals with mental illness from possessing a firearm.
In McDonald v. City of Chicago, 567 F.3d 856 (2010), the Supreme Court stated Second Amendment protections applied to states and cities through the Fourteenth Amendment, therefore, state regulations could not violate an individual’s right to bear arms.
Circuit Court opinions following Heller suggests that courts are willing to uphold the following regulations:
- Regulations prohibiting weapons on government property.
- United States v. Dorosan, 350 Fed. Appx. 874 (5th Cir. 2009), upholding the defendant’s conviction for bringing a handgun onto post office property.
- Regulations prohibiting possession of a handgun as a juvenile delinquent.
- United States v. Rene E., 583 F.3d 8 (2009), holding that the Juvenile Delinquency Act ban of juvenile possession of handguns did not violate the Second Amendment.
- Regulations requiring a permit to carry concealed weapons.
- Kachalsky v. County of Westchester, 701 F.3d 81 (2nd Cir. 2012), holding that a New York law preventing individuals from obtaining a permit to possess a concealed firearm in public for general purposes did not violate the Second Amendment.
In 2022, the Supreme Court further expanded upon the precedent set by Heller in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1. In Bruen, the Court struck down a New York law requiring parties interested in purchasing a handgun for the use of self-defense outside of the home to obtain a special license because the law issued licenses on a “may-issue” rather than a “shall issue” basis. The Court held that the “may issue” licensing method allowed state authorities to deny interested parties public use licenses for firearms based on subjective findings which violated the Second Amendment. Furthermore, the Court disavowed the use of “means-end tests” for the purposes of interpreting the Second Amendment. Instead, a Second Amendment analysis is limited to the evaluation of the historical nature of the right, and whether a given use of a firearm or other weapon is deeply rooted in the history of the United States.
Post-Bruen, a jurisdiction wishing to place restrictions on firearm ownership must “affirmatively prove that its firearms regulation is part of the historical tradition that delimits the outer bounds of the right to keep and bear arms.”
For more information, please see the U.S. Constitution, Second Amendment Annotated.
[Last reviewed in June of 2026 by the Wex Definitions Team]