Has the Pennsylvania Supreme Court resolved Commonwealth v. Sumpter or issued a statewide ruling on Philadelphia’s open‑carry licensing rule?
Executive summary
The Pennsylvania Supreme Court has not yet resolved Commonwealth v. Sumpter and has not issued a statewide ruling invalidating Philadelphia’s open‑carry licensing rule; the Pennsylvania Superior Court issued a 2–1 decision in June 2025 vacating Riyadh Sumpter’s conviction and declaring Section 6108 unconstitutional as applied to him, but the opinion stopped short of striking the statute down on its face and remains subject to further appeal [1] [2] [3].
1. Background: how a Philadelphia‑only rule became a constitutional test case
Philadelphia is uniquely affected by 18 Pa.C.S. § 6108 because the statute criminalizes open carry in a “city of the first class” while open carry is generally permitted elsewhere in the Commonwealth, and a prosecution of Riyadh Sumpter for openly carrying a handgun in West Philadelphia created the factual vehicle that brought the question to the Superior Court [3] [4].
2. What the Superior Court actually held in Commonwealth v. Sumpter
In a June 23, 2025 majority opinion, Judges Lazarus and Stabile vacated Sumpter’s conviction, concluded that the right to bear arms outside the home is a fundamental right under recent U.S. Supreme Court precedents, applied strict scrutiny to the geographically disparate rule, and found that the Commonwealth failed to show a compelling, narrowly tailored justification for treating Philadelphia differently—language that casts strong doubt on § 6108’s constitutionality as applied [3] [5] [6].
3. Limits of the decision: “as‑applied,” not facial, and the split in the court
The Superior Court expressly limited its ruling to Sumpter’s circumstances—an “as‑applied” holding—rather than issuing a facial invalidation that would automatically free every Philadelphian to open carry; the majority vacated the sentence but declined to formally repeal the statute, and the opinion drew a sharp dissent from Judge Timika Lane who argued Sumpter’s failure to apply for a license undermined his claim and that precedent should have been followed [7] [1] [8].
4. Has the Pennsylvania Supreme Court weighed in? Not yet — the appeal path remains open
Multiple outlets report that the Commonwealth and interested parties are expected to seek review by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court and that the state’s highest court has signaled it will weigh the issue; as of the published reporting in June–September 2025, the Supreme Court had not issued a decision reversing or affirming Sumpter, so the Superior Court’s ruling stands but is potentially temporary pending further review [5] [1] [2].
5. Practical legal effect today and what to watch next
Practically, the Superior Court decision vacated Sumpter’s conviction and establishes persuasive—and in many lower courts binding—authority that § 6108 is constitutionally suspect when applied like it was here, but because the ruling is as‑applied and the PA Supreme Court has not resolved the matter, prosecutors could still charge others and defendants will need to litigate the issue anew or await a statewide, final ruling; stakeholders on both sides are framing the decision as either a blueprint for uniform gun rights or a call to seek higher‑court review and legislative clarification [3] [9] [2] [1].
6. Competing narratives and the hidden stakes
Gun‑rights groups hailed the Superior Court’s holding as a nationwide‑style win for uniformity across city lines, while gun‑safety advocates and the lone dissent warned that the majority misapplied precedent and that the practical policy tradeoffs for a dense urban jurisdiction were not adequately considered—an implicit agenda battle over whether courts or the legislature should resolve divergent local public‑safety choices if the Pennsylvania Supreme Court does not act [2] [1] [8].