A breaking incident in Minneapolis, where a nurse was shot during protests tied to a federal immigration enforcement operation, is reigniting a national debate over the Second Amendment and the right to carry firearms at public demonstrations. As details continue to emerge, anti-gun advocacy groups have seized on the event—while simultaneously taking contradictory positions in courtrooms across the country.

At the center of the controversy is a growing push to classify protests and demonstrations as “sensitive places,” where firearms can be banned outright. This issue is already playing out in the courts. Just last week, the Fourth Circuit upheld a Maryland law restricting firearms at public demonstrations, despite strong historical evidence suggesting that Americans have long carried arms at public gatherings for self-defense.

Critics point out the irony: many of the same anti-gun organizations now portraying armed protest attendance as “normal” have argued in litigation that no such right exists. Historical records—from colonial laws to statements by Founding Fathers like John Adams—show that peaceful firearm carry at public assemblies was not only allowed, but sometimes required.

As states increasingly attempt to restrict carry rights under the guise of public safety, the Minneapolis shooting underscores a larger legal battle that is far from settled. Whether these protest-related gun bans can survive Supreme Court scrutiny remains an open—and critical—question for the future of the Second Amendment.