Abstract The article analyzes early U.S. Supreme Court jurisprudence on the Second Amendment, focusing on United States v. Cruikshank (1876), Presser v. Illinois (1886), and United States v. Miller (1939). It examines how these rulings interpreted the right to keep and bear arms and their influence on shaping the amendment’s meaning. Using case law analysis, historical methods, and comparative review of American and Polish legal scholarship, the study highlights that early Supreme Court decisions viewed the right to keep and bear arms not as an individual guarantee against state interference, but as a collective entitlement tied to well regulated militia. This collective interpretation dominated for over a century until District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010), which redefined the Second Amendment as a source of individual rights to possess and carry firearms. The analysis clarifies the historical evolution of Second Amendment interpretation and its enduring importance for contemporary constitutional debate. The findings demonstrate that early jurisprudence profoundly shaped American constitutional culture and that the modern, individual-rights understanding of the Second Amendment is a relatively recent product of constitutional reinterpretation.
Piotr Czeczot (Sun,) studied this question.