The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and its partners have filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court urging the court hear David Robinson Jr. v. United States of America, challenging restrictions on short-barreled rifles (SBRs).
SAF is joined in the amicus filing by the Second Amendment Law Center, California Rifle & Pistol Association and Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus.
“In its ruling, the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals decided that U.S. v. Miller (1939), and its ruling allowing restrictions on short-barrel shotguns because they had no documented militia use, remains controlling and applicable to SBRs as well,” said SAF Director of Legal Research and Education Kostas Moros. “That’s wrong because even if it were correct that Miller remains the relevant standard, SBRs are demonstrably in regular use today in military roles, as the M4 rifle is the standard issue rifle of our military.”
Kostas added, “Our amicus brief also makes several other arguments as to why the Eleventh Circuit’s analysis was flawed, and why the Supreme Court should grant cert in this case. We are hopeful the Supreme Court will step in and correct courts reaching the wrong conclusion on this fundamental question, both as it pertains to SBRs and to other common arms.”
The brief explains that SBRs are “arms” under the plain text of the Second Amendment. To then regulate them, it is the government’s burden to show a historical tradition of such regulation. The core of the challenged law distinguishes certain arms based on barrel length for particularly stringent regulation. But there is no historical tradition of restricting firearms based on barrel length.
Kostas explained that the core holding of U.S. v. Miller was that the arms the Second Amendment protects are those that are useful in militia service. Today, SBRs are not just useful in that role, they are the standard-issue rifle of the U.S. military, with standard M4 Rifles having barrels that are 14.5 inches long (under the 16-inch threshold established by the challenged law), and many widely used variants like the MK18 being shorter still. SAF argues to the extent Miller is still relevant at all, it supports the SAF’s arguments, not the other way around.
“This amicus brief is but one part of a broader effort by SAF to fight a multi-pronged battle against the NFA’s restrictions on SBRs and silencers,” said SAF founder and executive vice president Alan M. Gottlieb. “In addition to this amicus brief, we have a landmark new lawsuit in Brown v. ATF challenging the entire constitutionality of portions of the National Firearms Act, all with the same goal in mind: Restoring the Second Amendment rights of all Americans.”
