Which states have anti‑parading or anti‑paramilitary statutes and what are their full texts?
Executive summary
A patchwork of state laws regulates private militias, parading and paramilitary activity: researchers and legal advocates report that every state has some prohibition touching private paramilitary conduct, while narrower criminal bans on “drilling” or “parading” with arms and statutes outlawing paramilitary training are present in roughly a quarter to a third of states (numbers vary by source) [1] [2] [3]. The reporting assembled here documents the contours and counts of those laws but does not contain the full statutory texts for each state; where full texts are available they must be retrieved from the individual state codes or the cited law-firm and academic compilations [4] [1].
1. What the sources agree on: a nationwide legal scaffold, not uniform language
Multiple legal primers and advocacy groups conclude that all 50 states have at least one legal bar on private paramilitary conduct—whether by constitutional subordination clauses, anti‑militia statutes, or anti‑paramilitary activity laws—yet the specific prohibitions differ in wording, scope, and enforcement history (Georgetown ICAP; Brennan Center) [1] [2]. Scholars tally overlapping categories: about 29 states have statutes like the historic “anti‑militia” law upheld in Presser that forbid unauthorized organization and parading as a militia; roughly 25–26 states have criminal statutes specifically barring paramilitary training—teaching or organizing others to use weapons or tactics to further civil disorder—and other counts show 28 states forbidding drilling or parading in public with firearms [5] [3] [6].
2. Examples and precedent cited by advocates and courts
Reports repeatedly point to concrete statutory examples and enforcement history: Georgia’s statutory scheme includes an anti‑militia and an anti‑paramilitary activity provision cited in advocacy materials, New York’s military code contains a Presser‑style prohibition, Florida has a named “State Antiparamilitary Training Act” referenced in compilations, and Wyoming’s code expressly forbids associating as a military company or parading with arms absent gubernatorial license—each example is discussed in source snippets and memos [1] [7] [8] [9]. Courts have upheld such laws under long‑standing precedent: Presser v. Illinois and subsequent citations recognize that states may prohibit private military organization, and a federal district court in Texas enforced its state anti‑militia law against a KKK militia in 1982 [5] [2].
3. What is missing from the reporting: full statutory texts and state‑by‑state language
The assembled reporting provides counts, categorizations, and illustrative citations but does not reproduce the full statutory text for each state; Georgetown’s fact sheets and law‑center summaries map the landscape and flag specific code sections, yet the complete, authoritative statutory language for each jurisdiction must be obtained from the official state codes or legislative websites (ICAP press release; Georgetown fact sheets) [4] [1]. Consequently, this report cannot truthfully present “the full texts” for the states; instead it points to precise entry points (state codes cited in sources such as GA. CODE ANN. § 16‑11‑151 and N.Y. MIL. LAW § 240 in the memos) for further retrieval [7] [1].
4. Political context, enforcement, and why advocates ask for federal action
Advocates pushing federal legislation argue that state laws are often antiquated, under‑enforced, or unevenly applied; Congress proposals (e.g., Preventing Private Paramilitary Activity Act drafts) aim to create a national baseline while preserving state authority, a tension reflected in the bill language that explicitly carves out state law consistency (S.3589 text) [10] [11]. Policy groups such as Giffords and Georgetown link these statutes to public‑safety goals after incidents like Charlottesville and January 6, emphasizing that state prohibitions vary in remedy (criminal vs. civil injunctions) and that some states recently updated laws (e.g., Oregon) to address armed paramilitary public conduct [12] [2].