Ballot measure proposes expanding Arkansas constitution's right to bear arms

Arkansas voters heading to the polls this midterm election face a high-stakes decision on the future of state-level firearm regulations. Issue 2, a proposed constitutional amendment, seeks to fundamentally rewrite how the Arkansas Constitution defines the right to keep and bear arms. If approved, the measure would shift the state’s legal framework from a focus on “common defense” to an expansive, individual right that includes the possession of ammunition, firearm accessories, and components “without limitation.”

Defining the Scope of Individual Rights

The current language in the Arkansas Constitution dates back to a time when the right to bear arms was explicitly tied to the state’s “common defense.” Proponents of Issue 2, led by the Gun Owners of Arkansas (GO-AR), argue that this phrasing is outdated and leaves the door open for restrictive legislation. By moving to a standard that labels the right as “natural, fundamental, and individual,” supporters believe they are preemptively shielding gun owners from future government overreach.

Gary Epperson, president of Gun Owners of Arkansas, has been the primary architect behind the push. Through his advocacy group, Epperson successfully lobbied state lawmakers to place the measure on the ballot. According to finance reports from October, the nonprofit has already funneled more than $20,000 into advertising and printed materials to support the amendment’s passage. For Epperson, the amendment is a necessary hedge against potential federal or state efforts to restrict modern firearm accessories or ammunition types.

“With this wording anti-gun legislators could create havoc with the individual right to keep and bear arms,” Epperson said. “Relying on the U.S. Supreme Court could take multiple generations before they would select a court challenge even if they did.”

The Legal Threshold of Strict Scrutiny

The core of the debate rests on judicial standards. By enshrining the right in the state constitution with the language “shall not be infringed,” proponents aim to force state courts to apply “strict scrutiny” to any future gun control legislation. As defined by the Cornell Law School’s Legal Information Institute, strict scrutiny is the highest standard of judicial review. It requires the government to prove that a law is narrowly tailored to achieve a compelling interest—a hurdle that is notoriously difficult to clear in court.

However, this shift has drawn sharp criticism from groups concerned with public safety. The Public Policy Center at the University of Arkansas Division of Agriculture has highlighted concerns that the “without limitation” clause could make it nearly impossible to maintain existing safeguards. Critics worry this language would unintentionally handicap the state’s ability to enforce restrictions on firearm possession for individuals convicted of domestic violence or those deemed a danger to themselves or others.

Conflicting Views on Public Safety

Casey Cromer, a lead for the Northwest Arkansas chapter of Moms Demand Action, argues that the amendment’s broad language creates a dangerous level of ambiguity. While acknowledging that many gun owners, herself included, support responsible ownership, she questions how the courts would balance an “absolute” right against the necessity of keeping communities safe from gun violence.

Colaition holds town hall in Fayetteville, pushes to change Arkansas ballot measure laws

“If their right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed as a natural and fundamental right, how are our courts going to enforce that,” Cromer said. “It seems like this extreme and absolute language…will create unintended consequences.”

The League of Women Voters of Arkansas has also formally opposed the measure. Kristin Foster, the organization’s executive director, noted that while they support lawful hunting and recreation, the scope of Issue 2 is simply too broad. Their stance emphasizes that the amendment lacks the nuance required to support consumer safety, background checks, and standard identity verification procedures.

The Path to Election Day

The proposal is one of four ballot measures currently before Arkansas voters. It arrives at a time when the broader national conversation on the Second Amendment is intensifying. With the U.S. Supreme Court currently preparing to weigh in on the constitutionality of assault weapon bans, the stakes for state-level amendments have never felt higher. If Issue 2 passes, it is set to take effect on January 1, 2027, potentially setting up a long-term clash between state constitutional protections and future legislative efforts to regulate the industry.

For voters, the choice is between two distinct visions of the Second Amendment: one that prioritizes an absolute, individual right protected from legislative interference, and another that prioritizes the state’s ability to adapt regulations for public safety. As the election cycle draws to a close, the debate remains a testament to the ongoing tension between historic constitutional interpretation and the realities of modern firearm technology.