Constitutional law experts Josh Blackman and Randy Barnett reported on Oct. 14, 2026, that the Supreme Court has undergone a significant shift in its interpretation of the First and Second Amendments over the last two decades. In a commentary published for SCOTUSblog, the authors detailed how the Roberts court moved from a period of strict church-state separation and limited gun rights to a framework that emphasizes religious liberty and individual firearm ownership.
The authors noted that in 2006, the court generally followed the 1990 precedent *Employment Division v. Smith*, which allowed the government to enforce neutral laws even if they burdened religious practices. Over the following 20 years, the court issued a series of rulings that expanded the "ministerial exception" for religious employers and barred states from excluding religious schools from taxpayer-funded programs. In 2022, the court’s decision in *Kennedy v. Bremerton School District* effectively abandoned the "Lemon test," a 1971 standard previously used to prevent the entanglement of church and state.
Regarding the Second Amendment, the authors highlighted that the court played almost no role in enforcing gun rights prior to 2008. The landmark *District of Columbia v. Heller* decision that year established an individual right to bear arms, which was later applied to the states in *McDonald v. City of Chicago*. More recently, the 2022 decision in *New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen* expanded this right to include carrying firearms in public.
Separately, a 2025 Harvard Law Review analysis noted that the Roberts court has deviated from historical patterns of "federalism rebalancing." While past courts, such as the Marshall and Taney courts, typically balanced expansions of power with shifts toward the other tier of government, the Roberts court has focused primarily on empowering states. The review stated that this "pro-state" trajectory has altered established federal-state relationships without a corresponding rebalance toward federal power.
The scale of the impact on the Second Amendment is reflected in the transition from virtually no Supreme Court oversight in 2006 to a series of rulings that now govern firearm possession for millions of Americans. In states with restrictive carry laws, residents now have a federally protected right to carry firearms in public, a change that nullified decades of local regulations. Conversely, the court has clarified limits, such as in *United States v. Rahimi*, where it ruled that individuals under domestic violence restraining orders can be prohibited from possessing arms.
The long-term impact involves a fundamental change in how the Bill of Rights is applied to local governments. By abandoning the "separationist" framework of the Lemon test, the court has set a precedent that allows for more religious expression in public spaces, such as schools and government buildings. The next steps for the court include a decision in *Viramontes v. Cook County*, which is expected to determine whether the Second Amendment protects the right to possess semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15. This ruling will likely address which specific types of arms are constitutionally protected.