For: George Creal, Georgia Criminal Lawyer
Case Overview: In Stephens v. State of Georgia, the Georgia Supreme Court addressed a constitutional challenge by 20-year-old Thomas Stephens against OCGA § 16-11-126(g)(1), which prohibits individuals aged 18 to 20 from obtaining a weapons carry license and carrying handguns in public, except in limited circumstances. Stephens argued that the statute violates Article I, Section I, Paragraph VIII of the Georgia Constitution of 1983, which protects the right to keep and bear arms but allows the General Assembly to regulate the manner in which arms are borne.
Key Facts:
- Georgia law permits individuals aged 18 to 20 to possess and carry long guns in public and handguns on their own property, in their home, car, or place of business, and for hunting, fishing, or sport shooting with appropriate licenses. They may also use firearms for self-defense or defense of others, which serves as an absolute defense to firearm regulation violations.
- Individuals under 21 cannot carry handguns in public generally unless they have military weapons training.
- Stephens, denied a weapons carry license at 18, challenged the age restriction, seeking an injunction against the statute’s enforcement.
- The trial court dismissed Stephens’s complaint, and he appealed, focusing solely on the Georgia Constitution, not the Second Amendment.
Court’s Analysis And Holding:
- Constitutional Framework: Paragraph VIII, in place since the 1860s, guarantees the right to keep and bear arms but includes a “manner clause” empowering the General Assembly to regulate how arms are carried. The Court has consistently interpreted this clause, since Hill v. State (1874), as allowing regulations that are not unreasonable, arbitrary, or effectively a deprivation of the right to bear arms (Strickland v. State (1911), Carson v. State (1978), Landers v. State (1983), Hertz v. Bennett (2013)).
- Stephens’s Argument: Stephens did not claim the statute violated Paragraph VIII under existing precedent but urged the Court to overrule its century-long interpretation and adopt federal standards (strict scrutiny or the U.S. Supreme Court’s “history and tradition” test from N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen (2022)) to assess the Georgia provision.
- Court’s Rejection: The Court declined to reconsider its precedent, emphasizing:
- Presumption of Constitutionality: Statutes are presumed constitutional, and challengers bear a heavy burden to prove a “clear and palpable” conflict with the Constitution (Ammons v. State (2022)).
- Original Public Meaning: Determining the original public meaning of Paragraph VIII requires analyzing its text, historical context, and legal precedents. Stephens failed to engage with this analysis or propose a viable alternative construction of the provision’s meaning.
- Rejection of Federal Standards: The Court criticized importing federal standards (strict scrutiny or Bruen’s test) to interpret Georgia’s unique constitutional text, which differs from the Second Amendment by explicitly granting regulatory power to the legislature (Wasserman v. Franklin County (2025)).
- Precedent Continuity: The Court noted that its consistent construction of Paragraph VIII, reaffirmed across multiple Georgia Constitutions, is likely embedded in the provision’s meaning as ratified in 1983, given presumptions of constitutional continuity and prior judicial construction (Elliott v. State (2019)).
- Outcome: Because Stephens’s challenge hinged on overturning settled precedent and he failed to demonstrate that the Court’s interpretation was clearly wrong, his claim failed. The Court affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of his complaint.
Implications For Practice:
- Statutory Compliance: OCGA § 16-11-126(g)(1) remains enforceable, restricting 18- to 20-year-olds from carrying handguns in public without military training. However, these individuals retain significant firearm rights (e.g., long gun carry, handgun use in specific locations, self-defense).
- Defense Strategies: The absolute defense for self-defense or defense of others under OCGA § 16-11-138 is a critical tool for clients charged with violating firearm carry restrictions.
- Constitutional Challenges: Future challenges to Georgia firearm laws under Paragraph VIII must grapple with the Court’s long standing precedent and the high burden to prove unconstitutionality. Arguments relying on federal Second Amendment standards are unlikely to succeed without a robust analysis of Georgia’s distinct constitutional text and history.
- Client Advisement: Advise clients aged 18 to 20 of their limited handgun carry rights and the importance of adhering to statutory exceptions to avoid prosecution.
Conclusion: The Georgia Supreme Court upheld the age-based restriction on public handgun carry for 18- to 20-year-olds, reinforcing its consistent interpretation of Paragraph VIII and rejecting calls to adopt federal constitutional standards. This decision underscores the General Assembly’s broad authority to regulate the manner of bearing arms under Georgia’s Constitution, provided regulations are not unreasonable or effectively a deprivation of the right.
Contact George Creal Today
If you’ve been charged with Gun Charges in Georgia, act quickly to protect your rights. Contact George C. Creal, Jr., P.C. Trial Lawyers for a Free consultation at (770) 961-5511, email firm@georgialawyer.com, or visit https://www.georgialawyer.com. Let Georgia’s premier Criminal Defense Law Firm fight for you with the skill and dedication you deserve.
