This article appeared in Knife Magazine in August 2025
Know Your Knife Laws – Federalism and the Repeal of Auto Knife Bans
By Anthony Sculimbrene, Attorney and Knife Expert
On the day this article was written, June 13, 2025, Vermont’s governor, Phil Scott, signed a repeal of Vermont’s automatic knife law into law. In doing so, Vermont joins the rest of New England in allowing automatic knives. Vermont’s method–legislative repeal stands in contrast to Massachusetts’ method of judicial review. In this article, we will look at the difference, how it impacts knife owners, and what the future will look like if the Federal Switchblade Act is repealed.
Before we get there, we need to lay out some legal principles. Two are key to understanding what happens when laws are repealed or invalidated. The first is the idea of dual sovereignty and preemption. The second is the idea of repeal versus constitutional invalidation.
The U.S. is a country of dual sovereignty. That means that there are at least two different authorities that promulgate laws–the federal government and the state government. The idea under the U.S. Constitution, specifically the 10th Amendment, was that the federal government was a government of limited scope while the State governments were more expansive in their authority. This decentralization was a key feature of the U.S. Constitution, as the document was written by men distrustful of kings and concentrated power. However, even with the dual sovereign model, the U.S. Constitution makes clear that federal laws trump state laws on the same topic. To use legal parlance–federal laws preempt state laws. So if there is a state law on a given topic with no federal law, the state law controls. If, however, there is both a state and federal law on a given topic, the federal law controls.
A law can be rendered non-functional in two primary ways–it can be repealed by legislative efforts or invalidated as unconstitutional by a court. One method is easier to accomplish but less powerful, while the other is exceedingly difficult to attain but definitive if achieved.
If the legislature passes a law, courts assume that it is valid unless challenged. The legislature has broad authority to pass laws and can do so without a case or controversy that necessitates a change in the law. That is, a legislature can, if the votes exist, pass a law to deal with something that MIGHT be a problem in the future. For example, there are laws on both the federal and state levels dealing with genetic engineering, even though our ability to do so is quite rudimentary. Legislatures can, if they want, think of a potential problem, pass the law now, and hopefully nip the problem in the bud. But if such a law becomes unworkable or unpopular, legislatures can go back and change the law or repeal it entirely. That is what happened in Vermont on June 13, 2025. But this is not a permanent change. If another legislature down the line sees fit to change the law back, they can.
When a court invalidates a law as unconstitutional, the law, as written, is forever invalidated. But getting a court to rule that a law is unconstitutional is exceptionally difficult. First, there must be an actual case or controversy. In Knife Rights v. Garland, the case was dismissed before the merits were reached because the court found there was no real controversy. That is, people not liking a law is not enough for the courts to get involved. If someone doesn’t like a law, their form of redress is to go to the legislature, not the courts. Without an actual dispute, even the most odious law will not be reviewed by a court. But even if there is an actual dispute, courts bend over backwards to save laws. First, they start with a default that all laws are valid. Second, they have a set of rules, or canons of construction, that favor keeping a law. Third, even if a law is invalidated in part, they have an obligation to interpret the law in a way that preserves as much of the original intent as they can. And finally, they will only invalidate a law on constitutional grounds if there is no other way to resolve the dispute. All of these safeguards are designed to prevent a legislature of one from overruling the will of the people. But, if a litigant can get through all of these hurdles and have a law declared unconstitutional, it’s over. The law is dead. A legislature can try to fix it and rewrite it, but if they don’t, the law cannot be applied going forward, no matter what. This is what happened in Massachusetts in 2024 in Commonwealth v. Canjura.
So what does the landscape look like right now? Many states have repealed their automatic knife laws, but the Federal Switchblade Act (FSA), which prohibits shipping autos through interstate commerce, still exists. So people are free to possess them in certain states but shipping them from state to state is a problem. Let’s suppose that every state repeals its auto knife ban; what then? Even if every state repealed its auto knife ban, shipping from state to state would be prohibited as long as the FSA remains in place. That is not ideal for knife owners, retailers, or companies. In short, the FSA needs to go if people are going to fully enjoy their Second Amendment rights to own and carry a switchblade. But, even if the FSA falls, there could still be problems. Remember, ours is a system of dual sovereigns. And while a repeal of the FSA would eliminate federal shipping prohibitions, it would have no preclusive effect on states. That is, once the federal law is gone, there is nothing preempting the states from passing their own laws regarding automatic knives, save a very esoteric legal doctrine called the Dormant Commerce Clause, which is a rabbit hole not worth exploring here. This is why the legislative repeals are so important. Even if a future legislature could change the law back, doing so would be difficult and would take time. Every state that embraces the Second Amendment now is one less knife owners have to worry about in the future.
Obviously, the best case scenario would be for the U.S. Supreme Court to rule that the FSA is unconstitutional. Short of that, repeal on the federal level is the next best scenario. Federal repeal coupled with state repeal or court rulings on constitutionality will ensure that knife owners can carry autos as they see fit. Equally important, such a scenario will allow knife retailers and knife producers to tap into market demand that has been pent up since 1958. We are nearing repeals in all 50 states, but a few holdouts remain. We are also in an era where legislative efforts targeting the FSA are encouraging in the halls of Congress. As a great mind said, “the moral arc of the universe is long, but bends towards justice.”
If you agree with repealing the FSA, please support the American Knife & Tool Institute’s legislative efforts to get this accomplished. Join and/or contribute to our Legislative Fund.