Facts
- Florida law made it a second-degree misdemeanor to openly carry a firearm in public, subject to specified exceptions, while generally allowing public carry only if the firearm was concealed and the person held a concealed-carry license.
- Dale Lee Norman had a Florida license to carry a concealed firearm.
- Norman was stopped on a public sidewalk in Fort Pierce while carrying a handgun holstered at his hip and visible (not covered by clothing).
- The State charged Norman with openly carrying a weapon in violation of Florida’s open-carry prohibition.
- Norman moved to dismiss, arguing the open-carry ban violated the Second Amendment and the Florida Constitution’s right-to-bear-arms provision and that strict scrutiny should apply.
- The trial court denied the motion; a jury convicted Norman.
- The trial court certified constitutional questions to the district court, which upheld the statute using intermediate scrutiny; the Florida Supreme Court accepted review.
Issues
- Whether Florida’s prohibition on openly carrying a firearm in public violates the Second Amendment when the state generally permits licensed concealed carry.
- Whether the prohibition violates the Florida Constitution’s right-to-bear-arms provision, given the Legislature’s authority to regulate the manner of bearing arms.
- What level of constitutional scrutiny applies to a ban on open carry that leaves licensed concealed carry broadly available.
Decision
- The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the decision upholding the open-carry prohibition and left Norman’s conviction intact.
- The court held the statute did not violate the Second Amendment because it regulated the manner of public carry rather than imposing a complete ban on carrying firearms for self-defense outside the home.
- The court held the statute did not violate the Florida Constitution because the state constitutional provision permits legislative regulation of the manner of bearing arms.
- The court applied intermediate scrutiny, concluding the restriction was substantially related to the State’s important interest in public safety and public order.
- The court relied on the existence of a “shall-issue” concealed-carry licensing system that allows eligible individuals to carry handguns in public in a concealed manner.
Legal Principles
- A prohibition on open carry may be treated as a regulation of the manner of bearing arms, not a destruction of the right, when the jurisdiction generally allows public carry through an accessible concealed-carry licensing regime.
- When a law burdens but does not eliminate the ability of law-abiding persons to carry firearms for self-defense outside the home, intermediate scrutiny may apply rather than strict scrutiny.
- Under intermediate scrutiny, the government must show the regulation is substantially related to an important governmental objective; public safety and public order qualify as important objectives in firearms regulation.
- A state constitutional right-to-bear-arms provision may expressly permit legislative regulation of the manner of bearing arms, supporting limits on open carry that preserve other avenues for lawful carry.
Conclusion
The Florida Supreme Court upheld Florida’s open-carry ban as a permissible manner regulation under intermediate scrutiny, emphasizing that broad “shall-issue” concealed-carry licensing preserves meaningful public self-defense while advancing the State’s public-safety objectives.