US v Miller

Judgement

UNANIMOUS DECISION FOR UNITED STATES MAJORITY OPINION BY JAMES C. MCREYNOLDS The purpose of the Second Amendment was to maintain effective state militias; Congress could require registration of a 12-gauge sawed-off shotgun if carried across state lines

wiki

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Miller

Facts

An Arkansas federal district court charged Jack Miller and Frank Layton with violating the National Firearms Act ("NFA") when they transported a double barrel 12-gauge shotgun in interstate commerce. In part, Miller and Layton argued that the NFA violated their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. The district court agreed and dismissed the case.

Issue

Does the Second Amendment protect an individual's right to keep and bear arms?

Conclusion

No. The Supreme Court reversed the district court, holding that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual the right to keep and bear a sawed-off double barrel shotgun. With Justice James Clark McReynolds writing for the majority, the Court reasoned that because the possession of a sawed-off double barrel shotgun does not have a reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia, the Second Amendment does not protect the possession of such an instrument.

Holding

The National Firearms Act — as applied to transporting in interstate commerce a 12-gauge shotgun with a barrel less than 18 inches long, without having registered it and without having in his possession a stamp-affixed written order for it — was not unconstitutional as an invasion of the reserved powers of the States and did not violate the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution.