SCOTUS Relists “Assault Weapon” Ban Case… Again.

The U.S. Supreme Court has now relisted the high-profile Second Amendment case Snope v. Brown for the 13th time, leaving gun rights advocates hopeful – but restless. According to constitutional attorney Mark W. Smith, host of the Four Boxes Diner YouTube channel, this level of repeated consideration could indicate that something big is brewing behind the scenes.

“This is a very big number,” Smith said. “And it bodes relatively well, statistically speaking, that the Supreme Court is seriously considering granting cert.” For those unfamiliar with the term, “cert” refers to certiorari, the process by which the Supreme Court agrees to hear a case.

What’s at Stake in Snope v. Brown

The Snope case challenges Maryland’s sweeping ban on so-called “assault weapons,” including popular semi-automatic rifles like the AR-15. Smith describes it as the “cleanest” Second Amendment case currently on the Court’s docket, arguing that it squarely involves weapons that are commonly owned and lawfully used by millions of Americans.

According to Smith, the Supreme Court’s own precedents, particularly Heller (2008) and Caetano (2016), suggest that commonly used firearms are protected under the Constitution. “You apply the Heller-Caetano precedent,” Smith said. “You find that semi-automatic rifles are in common use by Americans for lawful purposes. It’s not even a debate.”

13 Relists: What That Actually Means

To the average person, 13 relists might seem like foot-dragging. But to Supreme Court watchers like Mark W. Smith, it’s a signal. “The Dobbs case, which overturned Roe v. Wade, was relisted 12 times before cert was granted,” he explained. “We’ve now passed that with Snope. That’s big.”

Relisting happens when the Court chooses to postpone a decision on whether to hear a case. It may mean the justices are writing opinions, crafting dissents, or simply waiting for more internal consensus. “The more relists you see, the more likely something is going on behind the scenes,” Smith noted.

Why SCOTUS Doesn’t Say Yes Easily

The Supreme Court only grants cert in about 1% of the thousands of petitions it receives each year. That number ticks up slightly, around 4%, for higher-profile cases, but even then, it’s a steep climb. “Even paying clients with the best legal teams only have a 4% shot,” Smith said, citing data from SCOTUSblog, a leading source of Supreme Court analysis.

So when a case like Snope sticks around after 13 relists, it suggests serious deliberation. “Most cases just get tossed aside,” Smith added. “But this one keeps coming back to the table.”

Strategic Voting Behind Closed Doors

According to Smith, just because a case has support among several justices doesn’t mean they’ll vote to hear it. “Sometimes justices who want to take a case will vote not to grant cert if they’re unsure of the final outcome,” he explained. “They don’t want to create bad precedent.”

This strategic decision-making can slow the process, especially in high-stakes cases like Snope, where the ruling could reset gun laws across the country.

What About Ocean State Tactical?

Smith also discussed Ocean State Tactical v. Rhode Island, another case currently before the Court. That case challenges Rhode Island’s ban on “large-capacity” magazines. While it’s received attention, Smith says it’s less likely to be granted cert. “It’s on a preliminary injunction basis,” he explained. “The Supreme Court doesn’t usually like to hear cases in that procedural posture unless it’s about immunity.”

Still, Ocean State Tactical may get a boost if the Court decides to hear Snope. Smith suggests that justices could grant Snope, then send Ocean State Tactical back to lower courts for reconsideration in light of whatever ruling they make.

Statistical Hope From SCOTUSblog

Mark W. Smith drew attention to research by Professor John Elwood at SCOTUSblog, who studied patterns in relisted cases. Between 2016 and 2022, relisted cases had a 31–43% chance of eventually being granted cert, compared to the baseline 1% for all cases. Moreover, 66–75% of all cases the Court did hear had been relisted at least once.

“The more a case is relisted, the higher the odds that it gets either granted or summarily resolved,” Smith explained. A summary disposition would mean the Court issues a short ruling without oral arguments – an option still on the table for Snope.

Summary Ruling? Think Caetano

Smith referenced Caetano v. Massachusetts as a past example of the Supreme Court stepping in with a brief but powerful ruling. In that 2016 case, the Court slapped down a Massachusetts ruling that said stun guns weren’t protected by the Second Amendment.

“If they don’t want to go full-blown with oral arguments,” Smith said, “they could issue a per curiam opinion, just like in Caetano, and say: ‘Hey Maryland, your AR-15 ban doesn’t fly.’” That would still send shockwaves across states with similar laws.

Why This Case Matters So Much

Smith emphasized that the Snope case could be the defining Second Amendment battle of the decade. While other cases chip away at carry restrictions or magazine limits, Snope challenges the heart of modern gun control – bans on rifles that millions of Americans legally own.

“The Supreme Court has already ruled that handguns are protected,” Smith said. “So if they were ever going to approve a gun ban, logically, handguns would have been the target – not rifles, which are involved in far fewer crimes.”

Why the Delay Is Both Frustrating and Encouraging

From the outside, 13 relists feels maddening. Why won’t the Court just decide already? But if you understand how SCOTUS works, it actually feels like good news. They’re thinking. They’re weighing options. And they haven’t killed the case.

Here’s what I find encouraging: if the justices wanted to deny cert and walk away, they would’ve done it by now. The fact that they keep delaying a decision means they’re either debating how to handle it, or preparing a ruling that will send shockwaves through the legal system.

Looking Ahead: Will This Be the Next Bruen?

Smith concluded his breakdown by reminding viewers that we’ve seen this before. In 2020, the Court denied cert in Rogers v. Grewal, a New Jersey carry case. Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a scathing dissent. Then Amy Coney Barrett joined the Court, and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen followed in 2022, striking down “may issue” permit regimes.

Could Snope be the next Bruen? Smith thinks so. And if the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case, it could deliver another landmark ruling to solidify the Second Amendment’s reach.

Keep Watching – And Hoping

As of now, Snope v. Brown is still alive. And according to Smith, that’s worth celebrating. “Every day we’re still alive with Snope and Ocean State Tactical, I think is a good day,” he said. With support from groups like the Civil Rights Foundation and encouragement from Trump-era legal veterans like Solicitor General John Sauer, the pressure on SCOTUS is building.

The justices may be moving slowly, but sometimes, slow is the price of something big. Let’s just hope this is one of those times.