Without a three-fifths majority, the four measures intended to limit the sale of guns by varying degrees failed Monday.
The amendments ranged from closing the gun show loophole to not allowing those on the FBI terror watch list to purchase a firearm.
Fox 34 legal analyst Curtis Parrish said the debate was just political maneuvering for the November elections.
"Each one of these amendments are designed so that somewhere down the line, somebody can use that political fodder against somebody," Parrish said. "You voted this way so we shouldn't vote for you, or you voted this way therefore you should be voted out of office. These are more political statements then they are actual practical statements. Some of these particular amendments, practically will have a hard time working should they become law."
U.S. Attorney General, Loretta Lynch argued the case for California Senator Diane Feinstein, whose proposal would give the Department of Justice the ability to block gun sales to those on the terror watch list.
"We have a very strong law enforcement interest in protecting the types of investigations that in fact, put people on the watch list or that may be around those individual and so it's very important to us that we have the ability to conduct this in a way that lets us protect that information," Lynch said.
Texas Senator John Cornyn said we must target those responsible for gun crimes, not law-abiding citizens.
"I don't care who it is, whether it's the Obama administration, the former Bush administration, I don't think any American should sacrifice their Constitutional rights without forcing the government to go to an impartial magistrate or judge and be able to show sufficient evidence to convince the judge that they have the evidence to deny those Constitutional rights," Cornyn said.
Parrish said it should always come down to a question of constitutionality.
"The Second Amendment is a fundamental right for all Americans to keep and bear arms," Parrish said. "Now for a state or for a government agency to, even the federal government to come in and create laws that hamper that fundamental right, it has to be some strict scrutiny involved in that. So there has to be a very much compelling reason for laws to be passed that hinder that Second Amendment right."
The Supreme Court also refused to hear a challenge to an assault weapons ban in Connecticut, upholding the lower courts ruling, banning certain semi-automatic rifles and large capacity magazines.
