Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Guns topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Sponsor urges constitutional language to make gun rights a fundamental right under strict scrutiny
Summary
A sponsor presented a proposed Arkansas constitutional amendment to declare the right to keep and bear arms a fundamental, unalienable right (including ammunition and accessories) and to require strict scrutiny for any restriction; members debated legal questions about amending Article 2 and potential conflicts with other constitutional provisions.
Little Rock — Committee members considered a proposed state constitutional amendment intended to strengthen protections for the right to keep and bear arms.
The presenter said the text would declare that "the citizens of this state shall have the right to keep and bear arms" as a fundamental right and would explicitly include ammunition and accessories "typical to the normal function of such arms." The proposal would require any restriction to survive strict scrutiny and would prohibit state or local governments from infringing the right. The sponsor cited a 19th-century Arkansas case, Buzzard v. State, as an example of historical judicial interpretation that treated the state provision as a collective, militia-based right; the amendment sponsor said the new language is intended to confirm an individual right.
"Some of this language came from a Missouri constitutional amendment that passed in 2014," the sponsor said, and argued that elevating the right to fundamental status would make it harder for future laws to impose restrictions.
Committee members raised constitutional-process questions. Senator Ballenger noted Article 2's broader role as a bill of rights and cautioned that amending Article 2 could create legal uncertainty or put other Article 2 protections at risk unless the amendment is carefully drafted. He suggested placing the new language in a separate section of the constitution that references Article 2 rather than directly amending Section 5. The sponsor acknowledged the issue and said staff and BLR (Bureau of Legislative Research) counsel should be consulted before any referral.
No formal action was taken; members agreed to consult attorneys and consider whether to refer the proposal later in the session.
