Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/23pdf/22-915_8o6b.pdf
Page Number: 78.0

Cite as:  602 U. S. ____ (2024) 

7 

THOMAS, J., dissenting 

§922(g)(8) addresses a societal problem—the risk of inter-
personal violence—“that has persisted since the 18th cen-
tury,” yet was addressed “through [the] materially different
means” of surety laws.  Id., at 26.  Surety laws were, in a 
nutshell, a fine on certain behavior.  If a person threatened 
someone in his community, he was given the choice to either
keep the peace or forfeit a sum of money.  Surety laws thus
shared  the  same  justification  as  §922(g)(8),  but  they  im-
posed a far less onerous burden.  The Government has not 
shown that §922(g)(8)’s more severe approach is consistent 
with our historical tradition of firearm regulation. 

1 
The Government does not offer a single historical regula-
tion that is relevantly similar to §922(g)(8).  As the Court 
has  explained,  the  “central  considerations”  when  compar-
ing modern and historical regulations are whether the reg-
ulations “impose a comparable burden” that is “comparably
justified.”  Id., at 29.  The Government offers only two cate-
gories  of  evidence  that  are  even  within  the  ballpark  of 
§922(g)(8)’s burden and justification: English laws disarm-
ing persons “dangerous” to the peace of the kingdom, and 
commentary  discussing  peaceable  citizens  bearing  arms. 
Neither category ultimately does the job. 

i 
The Government points to various English laws from the
late 1600s and early 1700s to argue that there is a tradition 
of restricting the rights of “dangerous” persons.  For exam-
ple, the Militia Act of 1662 authorized local officials to dis-
arm individuals judged “dangerous to the Peace of the King-
dome.”  14  Car.  2  c.  3,  §13.    And,  in  the  early  1700s,  the 
Crown authorized lords and justices of the peace to “cause
search to be made for arms in the possession of any persons 
whom they judge dangerous, and seize such arms according 
to  law.”  Calendar  of  State  Papers  Domestic:  William  III,