Sometimes the most consequential gun control stories don’t start with a bill banning firearms. They start with lawmakers trying to expand freedom — and discovering that the Constitution doesn’t bend the way critics expect it to.

That is exactly what just happened in Montana.

In an effort to strengthen the right to carry, Montana lawmakers may have effectively erased gun-free school zones everywhere except on school property itself. Not through activism. Not through litigation designed to gut federal law. But through their own permitless carry statutes — and a federal court noticed.

The result is a ruling that has left gun-control advocates furious, school administrators uneasy, and Second Amendment supporters pointing out an inconvenient truth: when the state recognizes the right to carry as a right, federal carve-outs start to fall apart.

How Montana Got Here

In 2021, the Montana Legislature rewrote the state’s concealed carry laws. The intent was straightforward: eliminate the need for a permit and recognize that law-abiding citizens have a presumptive right to carry concealed firearms unless specifically prohibited by law.

Montana did not create a licensing system administered by a state agency. Instead, it licensed citizens directly through statute.

That distinction mattered — a lot.

Under the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act, carrying a firearm within 1,000 feet of a school is generally prohibited, with several exceptions. One of those exceptions applies to individuals “licensed” by the state.

When Montana decided that essentially all eligible adults are authorized by law to carry concealed firearms, it created a legal problem for federal prosecutors — whether lawmakers realized it or not.

The Case That Exposed the Loophole

That problem surfaced in Billings.

A local man, Gabriel Metcalf, routinely walked his neighborhood near Broadwater Elementary School while armed. Sometimes openly. Sometimes carrying a 20-gauge shotgun. Parents, teachers, and residents repeatedly called the police. Officers responded dozens of times.

And every time, police were forced to acknowledge the same reality: Metcalf was not breaking Montana law.

School officials responded by moving children away from the area and erecting visual barriers. Local police could do little more than talk to him.

Eventually, federal authorities stepped in and charged Metcalf under the Gun-Free School Zones Act.

That prosecution failed.

The Ninth Circuit’s Blunt Conclusion

The U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that because Montana statutorily authorizes concealed carry for eligible citizens, those citizens qualify for the federal licensing exception.

In plain terms: if everyone is licensed by law, then everyone qualifies for the exemption.

The court dismissed the charges and made it clear that the outcome wasn’t an accident; it was the logical result of Montana’s legislative choices.

The ruling emphasized that Montana did not delegate licensing authority to agencies or local officials. The Legislature itself granted the authority. Congress, the court said, did not clearly prohibit states from doing that.

The decision leaves gun-free school zones in Montana reduced to the boundaries of school property itself, land directly controlled by school boards.

What Hasn’t Changed

Schools still control their own property. Local school boards can prohibit firearms on school grounds, and those rules carry the force of law.

What has changed is the buffer zone.

The 1,000-foot invisible perimeter around schools, long treated as enforceable, no longer applies to lawful carriers under Montana’s statutory framework.

That matters not just to civilians but also to law enforcement. Officers can no longer rely on the federal statute to intervene simply because a person is armed near a school.

The Real Policy Debate Nobody Wants to Have

Predictably, critics framed the case as a failure of “responsible gun ownership.” Supporters countered that lawful carry is not criminal behavior, even when it makes people uncomfortable.

What stands out is what neither side seems eager to address.

Gun-free school zones have always existed in legal tension with the Second Amendment. This case did not create that tension; it exposed it.

When lawmakers choose to recognize the right to carry as a default condition of citizenship, federal laws built on licensing schemes begin to crack.

That is not a Montana problem. It is a structural one.

Fixing It Isn’t a Court Issue

Even the Ninth Circuit acknowledged the unease surrounding the outcome. But the court was clear: the solution is legislative, not judicial.

If Montana lawmakers want to restore buffer zones, they will have to rewrite the law, likely by reintroducing a permitting system or carving out new statutory exclusions.

Given Montana’s political makeup and the Legislature’s schedule, that is unlikely anytime soon.

The Legislature does not meet again until 2027. There is little appetite to revisit permitless carry. And any attempt to do so would face immediate backlash from voters who see the ruling not as a bug, but as a feature.

The Bigger Takeaway

This case is not about one man walking a sidewalk with a firearm.

It is about what happens when lawmakers affirm the Second Amendment without hedging their words. When they do, downstream consequences follow, including the collapse of laws that were never fully compatible with the right to begin with.

Montana did not nullify gun-free school zones by design.

It did something more powerful.

It treated the right to carry like a right, and federal law couldn’t keep up.