## Facts

- Jack Miller and Frank Layton were indicted under the National Firearms Act of 1934 for transporting a double-barrel 12-gauge shotgun with a barrel under 18 inches from Oklahoma to Arkansas.
- The indictment alleged they transported the weapon without registering it and without possessing the required tax-stamp order.
- The defendants challenged the statute, arguing it was an invalid federal intrusion into state police power and violated the Second Amendment.
- The federal district court sustained the challenge, held the relevant NFA provision unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, and quashed the indictment.
- The United States took a direct appeal to the Supreme Court under the Criminal Appeals Act.

## Issues

1. Whether the National Firearms Act, as applied to interstate transportation of an unregistered short-barreled shotgun, is unconstitutional as an invasion of powers reserved to the States.
2. Whether the Act, as applied to such a weapon, violates the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court unanimously reversed the district court and reinstated the indictment.
- The Court held the Act was not unconstitutional as an invasion of reserved state powers, treating it as a valid tax measure with regulatory incidents.
- The Court held the Act did not violate the Second Amendment on the record presented because there was no evidence that a short-barreled shotgun had a reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the reversal.

## Legal Principles

- A federal statute imposing taxation and registration requirements on firearms may be sustained as an exercise of the federal taxing power even if it has regulatory effects.
- Second Amendment protection, as applied in this case, depended on whether the weapon type had a reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well-regulated militia.
- Absent record evidence that a particular weapon is ordinary militia or military equipment, a court need not conclude that the Second Amendment secures a right to keep and bear that weapon.
- Courts will not assume, without evidentiary support, that a specific weapon contributes to the common defense or falls within protected militia-related arms.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld the National Firearms Act as applied to an unregistered short-barreled shotgun transported in interstate commerce and rejected the Second Amendment challenge because the record contained no evidence linking that weapon to ordinary militia equipment or militia efficiency.


United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (1939)