The U.S. Supreme Court on Monday declined to review a challenge to zoning restrictions that prevented the development of a gun range in Michigan, rejecting a petition that claimed the limitations infringed on Second Amendment rights to firearm training.

Oakland Tactical Supply LLC, along with Michigan residents, sought to overturn a Sixth Circuit ruling upholding Howell Township’s zoning restrictions, which limit certain land parcels to agricultural or residential uses. The plaintiffs argued these restrictions violated constitutional rights by hindering residents’ ability to train with firearms. However, the justices provided no explanation for their decision to deny review.

Zoning and Second Amendment Tensions

The dispute centered on a proposed shooting range offering training from distances of up to 1,000 yards. A majority on the Sixth Circuit panel determined such long-range training was not essential to the Second Amendment’s protection of self-defense firearm training.

"It is difficult to imagine a situation where accurately firing from 1,000 yards would be necessary to defend oneself; nor have plaintiffs identified one," the majority wrote.

In contrast, U.S. Circuit Judge Raymond M. Kethledge dissented, asserting the Second Amendment inherently protects the right to train with firearms. "Restrictions on training can therefore hinder the right to bear arms," Kethledge argued, emphasizing that firearm training is a practical necessity for effective use.

justices michigan gun range ban review : Claims of a Circuit Split

In their petition, Oakland Tactical and the residents contended that the Sixth Circuit ruling created a split among federal circuits. They pointed to decisions in the Third and Seventh circuits that struck down similar zoning ordinances restricting commercial gun ranges, suggesting inconsistent interpretations of Second Amendment rights.

The petition warned that the Sixth Circuit’s reasoning could have broader implications, potentially curtailing related rights such as firearm acquisition and storage. Oakland Tactical claimed the case presented an ideal opportunity for the Supreme Court to clarify Second Amendment protections.

Township Defense and Zoning Impact

Howell Township countered that no circuit split existed, arguing the Sixth Circuit’s ruling aligned with others permitting restrictions on firearm training at specific locations or for certain purposes. The township emphasized that the Second Amendment does not explicitly protect activities such as long-distance shooting training.

Oakland Tactical had leased 352 acres in Howell Township to develop outdoor shooting ranges, including a 1,000-yard range for self-defense and other lawful purposes. However, the township's zoning rules confined the land to agricultural or residential uses, blocking the proposed development. The plaintiffs argued the ordinance forced residents to rely on distant and inconvenient ranges, but the Sixth Circuit found this unpersuasive, noting that the ordinance does not prohibit firearm training outright.

justices michigan gun range ban review : Broader Implications

While this decision leaves the Sixth Circuit's ruling intact, it underscores ongoing tensions between local zoning laws and Second Amendment rights. Advocates fear restrictive zoning could erode rights to access and train with firearms, while opponents argue such regulations are necessary for public safety and land use planning.

Representation

Oakland Tactical and the plaintiffs were represented by David H. Thompson, Peter A. Patterson, and John D. Ohlendorf of Cooper & Kirk PLLC, along with Joseph G.S. Greenlee of Greenlee Law PLLC and Martha A. Dean of the Law Offices of Martha A. Dean LLC. Howell Township was represented by Christopher S. Patterson of Fahey Schultz Burzych Rhodes PLC.