Arnold v. City of Cleveland

What the court held

Gun owners challenged a Cleveland ordinance banning the possession and sale of "assault weapons" under the Ohio Constitution's right to bear arms and under the federal Supremacy Clause, citing the federal Civilian Marksmanship Program. The Ohio Supreme Court held that Sections 1 and 4 of Article I confer an individual but not absolute right to bear arms, that the ordinance was a reasonable exercise of the police power rather than an infringement of a right requiring heightened scrutiny, and that it did not obstruct the federal marksmanship program. Final judgment was entered for the city; two justices would have remanded for an evidentiary record and applied strict scrutiny.

Summarized from the court's opinion.

What this case is about

municipal assault weapons ordinance under the Ohio constitutional right to bear arms

GunMapUSA summary of the issue, not a quotation from the court.

Key Dates

• 1993-08-11 — Decided

Sources

• CourtListener — retrieved 2026-08-08