Legislation to repeal "intent to go armed" - why now?
A couple of bills have been filed in 2026 in the Tennessee Legislature. One of those
HB2514/SB2478 (Rep. Fritts and Sen. Hensley) is directly focused on eliminating the two statutes that were declared unconstitutional by the three-judge trial court in
Hughes et al. v. Lee, et al. Another is
HB2064/SB2467 (Rep. Todd/ Sen. Bailey) also addresses the two unconstitutional statutes but in somewhat different ways. But, it also does some things that have problems and even potentially violate the "nation's historical tradition" test from
Bruen.
Tennessee Firearms Association has been advocating for decades that Tennessee's statutes that criminalize conduct protected by the Second Amendment violate the constitutional rights of Tennesseans. Tennessee's Republican governors and the Legislature under the Republican super majority have repeatedly failed to repeal those statutes such as the "intent to go armed" statute, the "parks" statute and others.
When the Establishment Republicans stonewalled and refused to address the constitutional problems, citizens finally took to the courts.
In August 2025, after several years of litigation, a three-judge trial court unanimously ruled that Tennessee's "intent to go armed" and "parks" statutes violated the Second Amendment. Yet, Governor Lee and Attorney General Skrmetti decided to appeal that ruling in order to keep the unconstitutional statutes in place and infringing constitutionally protected rights.
Then, in 2026, some Republican legislators have filed bills yet again to try to address the state's clear violation of the rights protected by the Second Amendment. Suddenly, perhaps in light of that court ruling, it appears that there is a broader interest of the Republicans in the Legislature to deal with the constitutional crisis.
The pleas of TFA and citizens that were intentionally ignored are now being reconsidered following the unanimous trial court ruling.
One must wonder if some of these legislators would now be supporting changing these laws if citizens had not sued the state and won in the trial court.
It should never have been necessary for citizens to sue the state and win for legislators to merely do what the oaths to abide by the constitution have always required.
