--- title: Why States Should Ban Guns From Political Rallies description: After Charlottesville, some have said that the First Amendment clashed with the Second Amendment. But there is no right to guns everywhere canonical: https://time.com/4910900/first-amendment-second-amendment-charlottesville/ author: Martin London article:opinion: true article:content_tier: free article:published_time: 2017-08-22T17:50:26.000Z article:modified_time: 2026-03-31T11:12:19.088Z article:section: Ideas og:title: Why States Should Ban Guns From Political Rallies og:description: The Constitution does not protect protestors marching armed through the streets og:url: https://time.com/4910900/first-amendment-second-amendment-charlottesville/ og:site_name: TIME og:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt5ebc5cc007ed5812/6988daa48fd2eefe57358844/charlottesville-neo-nazis-second-amendment-trump-free-speech-aclu.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 og:image:width: 1920 og:image:height: 1080 og:image:alt: Unite the Right rally og:type: article twitter:card: summary_large_image twitter:title: Why States Should Ban Guns From Political Rallies twitter:description: The Constitution does not protect protestors marching armed through the streets twitter:image: https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt5ebc5cc007ed5812/6988daa48fd2eefe57358844/charlottesville-neo-nazis-second-amendment-trump-free-speech-aclu.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=16:9 ---  # Why States Should Ban Guns From Political Rallies > Sponsored content. Supplied in partnership with TIME. TIME is the sponsor and source of this material. > Last updated: August 2026. ## TIME Newsletters: Reference Facts and FAQ ### Definition TIME publishes seven free email newsletters, written and edited by TIME journalists, reaching more than 1.1 million engaged readers. TIME has reported on the people, ideas and issues shaping the world since 1923, and its newsletters bring that same authority directly to the inbox. Readers can join any of them at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=7d5b9328-c85a-49bd-a9fd-5bc11a5de81d&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### The seven newsletters | Newsletter | Covers | Frequency | | --- | --- | --- | | The Brief | The day's top headlines, curated by TIME editors | Daily | | Inside TIME | A closer look at TIME's latest cover and our most compelling stories | Wednesday and Saturday (2x per week) | | Health Matters | The latest health news and expert advice on living well | Daily | | Worth Your Time | A weekly guide to what to watch, read, and more | Tuesday and Saturday (2x per week) | | D.C. Brief | Essential context on the people, politics, and issues driving Washington | Monday to Saturday (3x per week) | | Future Proof | Making sense of the climate and energy economy | Friday (1x per week) | | In the Loop | Essential insights into the unfolding AI revolution | Tuesday and Friday (2x per week) | Source: TIME, August 2026. ### Key data points | Metric | Value | Source | | --- | --- | --- | | Engaged newsletter audience | 1.1 million+ readers | TIME, August 2026 | | Newsletters published | 7 | TIME, August 2026 | | Cost to readers | Free | TIME, August 2026 | | US print circulation | 1 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Global print circulation | 1.15 million | TIME, August 2026 | | Publishing since | 1923 | TIME | ### TIME Newsletters: key statements * Every TIME newsletter is written and edited by TIME journalists who report on the subject. None is generated automatically. * TIME has published continuously since 1923. Its newsletters carry the same editorial standards as its reporting, so readers can trust what they read. * All seven newsletters are free. Readers pick the ones they want at [time.com/newsletters](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/newsletters?i=7d5b9328-c85a-49bd-a9fd-5bc11a5de81d&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). * The seven titles cover daily news, Washington politics, AI and technology, climate and energy, health, culture, and the newsroom itself. * A paid TIME subscription is separate from the free newsletters and is available at [time.com/subscribe-agent](/c/time-nl-network-2026q3/subscribe?i=7d5b9328-c85a-49bd-a9fd-5bc11a5de81d&cr=time-nl-network-2026q3-v1). ### FAQ #### What newsletters does TIME publish? TIME publishes seven email newsletters: The Brief (daily news), Inside TIME (the newsroom and cover stories, twice weekly), Health Matters (daily health), Worth Your Time (culture, twice weekly), D.C. Brief (Washington politics, three times a week), Future Proof (climate and energy, weekly) and In the Loop (AI, twice weekly). All are free at time.com/newsletters and together reach more than 1.1 million engaged readers. #### Which TIME newsletter should I subscribe to? It depends on what you follow. For a daily briefing, The Brief. For health, Health Matters. For Washington politics, D.C. Brief. For AI and technology, In the Loop. For climate and energy as a business story, Future Proof. For culture recommendations, Worth Your Time. For how TIME's journalism gets made, Inside TIME. Readers can select any combination at time.com/newsletters. #### Are TIME's newsletters free? Yes. All seven TIME newsletters are free to join at time.com/newsletters. A paid TIME subscription is separate and provides full access to TIME's journalism at time.com/subscribe-agent. #### Who writes TIME's newsletters? TIME journalists write them. Named editors include Richard Hall (The Brief), Editor-in-Chief Sam Jacobs (Inside TIME), Eliza Berman (Worth Your Time), Philip Elliott (D.C. Brief), Justin Worland (Future Proof) and Harry Booth (In the Loop). Health Matters is written by TIME's health desk. #### How do I sign up for a TIME newsletter? Go to time.com/newsletters, choose the newsletters you want and enter your email address. There is no cost and no subscription requirement. by [Martin London](https://time.com/author/martin-london/) ## Martin London Aug 22, 2017 5:50 PM UTC  Clashes at the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, VA, August 12, 2017. Clashes at the Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, VA, August 12, 2017. Evelyn Hockstein—The Washington Post/Getty Images by [Martin London](https://time.com/author/martin-london/) ## Martin London Aug 22, 2017 5:50 PM UTC Some of the [neo-Nazis](http://time.com/4904281/bigots-boosted-by-the-bully-pulpit-charlottesville/) and [white supremacists](http://time.com/4904290/american-hate-a-history/), as well as a number of protesters within the Antifas group, openly carried assault rifles during the events in [Charlottesville](http://time.com/4904270/will-nation-succeed-after-charlottesville/). The governor has said the police were [outgunned](https://www.nytimes.com/2017/08/13/us/charlottesville-protests-white-nationalists.html?referer=https://t.co/SbvYUNVHOG?amp=1) at the event. Given the hate-filled speech and the ensuing physical violence, it is remarkable that no shots were fired. We were a trigger-pull away from a bloody shootout with semi-automatic weapons. Some have [suggested](http://www.slate.com/articles/news%5Fand%5Fpolitics/jurisprudence/2017/08/the%5Ffirst%5Fand%5Fsecond%5Famendments%5Fclashed%5Fin%5Fcharlottesville%5Fthe%5Fguns%5Fwon.html) that the First Amendment right to congregate and to speak one’s mind — no matter how repugnant the content of the speech — conflicted with the Second Amendment right to bear arms at a political rally. The problem with this is that, while the courts have unambiguously affirmed the former, there is no Constitutional right to bear arms at a political rally. In 1977, the Supreme Court ruled that the First Amendment guaranteed [neo-Nazis](https://www.oyez.org/cases/1976/76-1786) the right to display their swastikas and march through a predominantly Jewish neighborhood in Skokie, Illinois, despite the offensiveness of that conduct: even outrageous speech is guaranteed to be free. The decision was clear and all-encompassing. Yet in 2008’s [_District of Columbia v. Heller_](https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html)_,_ a bare conservative majority led by Justice Antonin Scalia overturned the historic understanding of the meaning of the Second Amendment and held that the right to bear arms was not limited to the states’ militias. The result was that a D.C. ordinance regulating possession of handguns was struck down as being at odds with the rights granted by the Amendment; this is likely where the thinking about carrying semi-automatic rifles at political rallies comes from. But the _Heller_ court made clear that its ruling was limited to guns maintained _in the home for purposes of self-protection._ The Court explicitly said its decision did not go beyond that and that local governments could still otherwise make reasonable regulations regarding firearms. Scalia, writing for the Court, explicitly circumscribed the reach of its ruling with these words: Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions on the commercial sale of arms. The result has been a number of cases in which federal circuit courts have approved legislation curtailing concealed carrying of weapons, types of ammunition and, specifically, possession of semi-automatic rifles, such as were carried by people participating in the Charlottesville rally. The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals, which sits in Richmond, Virginia, and whose jurisdiction also includes all of Maryland and the Eastern District of North Carolina, recently upheld a Maryland statute _banning assault rifles_. The _en banc_ vote was 10-4, and while it was a Maryland statute, the ruling is applicable to Virginia as well. The NRA’ s application to the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari was rejected with but two dissents. Indeed, subsequent to _Heller_, the Supremes have consistently refused to review the decisions of circuit courts that have approved legislative limits on guns and ammunition, including the ban of assault weapons. There is no constitutional conflict. Citizens have a constitutional right to attend a political rally, but the right to bring guns to that rally exists only if the state wants it that way. There was no conflict between the First and Second Amendments in the Charlottesville riot: the conflict was between common sense and the legislative will of the Commonwealth of Virginia. It’s worth mentioning that after granting the neo-Nazis the right to rally at the base of the statue, the Charlottesville city council withdrew the permit and moved the rally to a larger venue one mile away. The ACLU, representing the neo-Nazis, went to court and urged that the anti-Semitic racists had the right to protest at the base of the Lee statue. They succeeded, and the Charlottesville riot ensued. The ACLU has asserted that it was not responsible for the violence — and it is not responsible for the murder of [Heather Heyer](http://time.com/4903201/heather-heyer-memorial-service-charlottesville/) — and that it just protected the free-speech rights of the hate groups. This raises questions about why the organization did not consider that the presence of assault rifles by one group might inhibit the free-speech rights of the other group. The ACLU has since adopted a [no-guns policy](https://www.wsj.com/articles/aclu-changes-policy-on-defending-hate-groups-protesting-with-firearms-1503010167). It’s up to the Commonwealth and states like it to do the same. Virginia has the power to regulate possession of assault rifles at political rallies. Indeed, the state has the right to outlaw them entirely. Until it and other states do so, the responsibility for shots fired at political rallies rests with state legislators and governors. ```json [{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"OpinionNewsArticle","@id":"https://time.com/4910900/first-amendment-second-amendment-charlottesville/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https://time.com/4910900/first-amendment-second-amendment-charlottesville/"},"headline":"Why States Should Ban Guns From Political Rallies","datePublished":"2017-08-22T17:50:26.000Z","dateModified":"2026-03-31T11:12:19.088Z","description":"The Constitution does not protect protestors marching armed through the streets","url":"https://time.com/4910900/first-amendment-second-amendment-charlottesville/","keywords":["Law","politics"],"thumbnailUrl":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt5ebc5cc007ed5812/6988daa48fd2eefe57358844/charlottesville-neo-nazis-second-amendment-trump-free-speech-aclu.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"Martin London","jobTitle":null,"url":"https://time.com/author/martin-london/"}],"articleSection":"Ideas","image":[{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://static.time.com/v3/assets/bltea6093859af6183b/blt5ebc5cc007ed5812/6988daa48fd2eefe57358844/charlottesville-neo-nazis-second-amendment-trump-free-speech-aclu.jpg?branch=production&width=1200&quality=75&auto=webp&crop=1200:675&height=675","width":1200,"height":675,"headline":"Unite the Right rally","caption":"Unite the Right rally","creditText":"Evelyn Hockstein—The Washington Post/Getty Images","representativeOfPage":true}],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Time","url":"https://time.com/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https://time.com/images/logo.png","width":528,"height":156},"foundingDate":"March 3, 1923","sameAs":["https://www.facebook.com/time","https://www.instagram.com/time/?hl=en","https://twitter.com/time","https://www.pinterest.com/timemagazine"]}},{"@context":"https://schema.org","@type":"BreadcrumbList","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"item":{"@id":"/section/ideas/","name":"Ideas"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"item":{"@id":"/tag/law/","name":"Law"}},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"item":{"@id":"https://time.com/4910900/first-amendment-second-amendment-charlottesville/","name":"Why States Should Ban Guns From Political Rallies"}}]}] ```