Doris Wise Montrose

The Supreme Court did not say the government can’t keep guns away from dangerous people. It can still prosecute people who are intoxicated, genuinely dangerous, or whose drug use can be shown to make them a real risk. What the Court did say is that the government can’t simply strip away a constitutional right because

The real significance of Justice Thomas’ concurrence isn’t just about gun rights—it’s about the constitutional limits on federal power. If Congress can regulate virtually anything merely because it once crossed a state line, then the Constitution’s system of limited, enumerated powers loses much of its meaning. This is a legally dense article, but it’s well

I believe governments—regardless of party—are generally more comfortable with a population that is unarmed or whose arms are subject to government approval. That’s why the Constitution begins with “We the People,” not “We the Government.” The founders understood that liberty is not granted by government; government is granted its authority by the people. Therefore, We

Remembrance is not a survival strategy For generations, Jews have repeated the phrase “Never Again.” It appears on memorials, in speeches, in museums, and at Holocaust commemorations across the world. The phrase carries enormous emotional and moral weight. For many Jews, it is sacred language. But after watching the world over the last several years,

The CDC’s job is to study disease, not become a taxpayer-funded clearinghouse for gun control advocacy. We’ve seen this movie before. For decades, anti-gun activists have tried to rebrand a constitutional right as a public health problem, then use government-funded “research” to justify the restrictions they wanted all along. Even the Dickey Amendment was enacted

Justice Jackson wants to scrap the Bruen test because it requires judges to respect the Constitution as it was written and understood, rather than treating the Second Amendment as a government permission slip that changes with political fashions. The problem isn’t that Bruen is “unworkable.” The problem is that for the first time in decades,

The jurisdictions most plagued by crime are often the ones that work hardest to harass concealed carriers and deny law-abiding citizens their constitutional rights. Yet gun ownership has increased while violent crime has fallen to historic lows. So much for the anti-gun claim that more guns automatically mean more crime. It turns out law-abiding gun

If states can simply redefine most public spaces as gun-free zones, the right to bear arms becomes little more than a theoretical right. Two Second Amendment cases have been heard by the Supreme Court this term. The Supreme Court’s opinions in those two cases are expected to be announced before the end of June 2026.

From a constitutional perspective, New York’s approach can be viewed as an attempt to burden Second Amendment rights indirectly by targeting the interstate firearms industry, despite federal protections enacted by Congress under its Commerce Clause authority. The nation’s high court this week chose to turn away a challenge brought by a gun industry trade group

The author writes that the state’s attorney “clutched her pearls and proclaimed that persons under the age of 25 are merely infants with underdeveloped brains, and so should not be allowed to possess firearms.” That is a curious argument when 18-, 19-, and 20-year-olds can vote, sign contracts, marry, serve in the military, sit on