The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has filed an amicus brief with the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in Yukutake v. Lopez, a case challenging Hawaii’s restrictive firearm purchase laws.

While the Plaintiffs prevailed before a Ninth Circuit three-judge panel, the case is now being reheard en banc. SAF is joined by the California Rifle & Pistol Association and the Second Amendment Law Center.

“Our brief contends that the Ninth Circuit’s practice of routinely granting en banc rehearing to overturn Second Amendment victories undermines public confidence in the judicial system,” said SAF Director of Legal Research and Education Kostas Moros. “We also argue that the court should reverse its erroneous interest-balancing standard set in B&L Productions, Inc. v. Newsom, which improperly revives a test rejected by the Supreme Court in Bruen. Hawaii’s laws clearly implicate the plain text of the Second Amendment, and without a historical basis, they cannot stand.” Read more

Federal District Court Judge Cathy Ann Bencivengo issued a permanent injunction siding with FPC and blocking enforcement of California laws preventing FPC’s members who reside outside of California from acquiring a carry license (commonly called a “Carry Concealed Weapons” license, or “CCW”). The injunction follows the Court’s July decision that the law was unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.

The Court held a hearing to resolve a dispute over the form of the injunction. The State of California had asked the Court to issue a complex injunction requiring applicants to submit a sworn statement declaring intent to carry in a specific county within the next 12 months and limiting applications to that county — along with five pages of additional conditions and qualifications. But the Court agreed with FPC, which asked the Court to enter a straightforward injunction simply blocking enforcement of the ban altogether.

“People do not lose their right to keep and bear arms when they visit California. With this injunction, they can finally protect themselves and their families while in the Golden State,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. Read more

The National Rifle Association, Gun Owners’ Action League, Pioneer Valley Arms, three NRA members, and another individual filed a complaint challenging Massachusetts’s ban on “assault-style” firearms. Following the filing, John Commerford, NRA-ILA Executive Director, issued the following statement:

“Radical gun grabbers in Massachusetts have run roughshod on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens,” said John Commerford, Executive Director of NRA-ILA. “These extreme and ill-conceived laws have created chaos in the Commonwealth, turning lawful gun owners into felons overnight. Today’s lawsuit filed by the NRA seeks to end arbitrary bans on commonly owned firearms and begin the process of restoring the constitutional rights of Bay Staters.”

BACKGROUND:

• • The case is named Hanlon v. Campbell, and the complaint was filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts.

Read more

FORT WORTH, Texas – Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) today warned of a new Trump Administration strategy to block enforcement of constitutional rights.

In its recent brief in Elite Precision Customs v. ATF — FPC’s Second Amendment lawsuit challenging the federal ban on purchasing handguns outside a person’s state of residence — the Department of Justice argued that, if FPC is successful in striking down the law, the court should enter an extremely narrow injunction that would leave the unconstitutional law in place for everyone except two individuals and one Texas firearms retailer, allowing them to continue denying millions of peaceable people their right to keep and bear arms.

“If the Court grants an injunction, that injunction should extend no further than to bar enforcement of any laws the Court deems unconstitutional against the named plaintiffs specifically identified in the complaint,” the Trump Administration argues in its brief. “Because the [FPC] has not identified any of its members other than the named plaintiffs, the government would have no way to know whom an injunction restricting enforcement of the challenged laws covers.” Read more

In response to the major Second Amendment victory in Ortega v. Grisham, the NRA lawsuit against New Mexico’s seven-day waiting period law, John Commerford, Executive Director of NRA-ILA, released the following statement:

“In courtrooms across America, the NRA is successfully leading the charge to protect law-abiding Americans’ Second Amendment rights. The 10th Circuit has sided with the NRA and held that radical waiting period laws are indeed unconstitutional. This decision not only impacts gun owners in New Mexico but serves as a key piece in dismantling similar gun control laws across the country.” – John Commerford, NRA-ILA Executive Director Read more

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and its partners secured a major victory Thursday after the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals issued a mandate overturning California’s “one-gun-per-month” restriction, setting a historic precedent.

In June, a unanimous decision from the Ninth Circuit ruled in favor of SAF and its partners in Nguyen v. Bonta, SAF’s challenge to California’s one-gun-per-month gun rationing law. SAF is joined in the case by the Firearms Policy Coalition and San Diego County Gun Owners PAC, two FFL gun dealers, and six private citizens including Michelle Nguyen, for whom the case is named.

“Today’s mandate issued by the Ninth Circuit marks the first time the court has issued a final decision striking down a law for infringing on the Second Amendment,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “Between Heller and Bruen, every case heard by a panel which concluded the law was contrary to the Second Amendment was reheard en banc by the court and ultimately upheld. This is a historic victory for Second Amendment rights in the Ninth Circuit and marks a measurable defeat for Governor Newsom and the legislature’s attempts to curtail the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms in California.” Read more

BELLEVUE, Wash. —— The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and its partners have filed a new lawsuit in Massachusetts challenging the commonwealth’s process for non-residents to acquire a license to carry (LTC).

The process of acquiring and maintaining a Massachusetts non-resident permit is wrought with burden, cost and delay. The initial permit application process often takes six months or more and includes repeated mandatory in-person visits to the commonwealth, creating an unconstitutional barrier to an applicant’s right to carry for self-defense. To add insult to constitutional injury, Massachusetts non-resident permits are only good for one year (while in-state permits are good for 6 years), requiring permit holders to file their renewals every year mere months after having received their permit, as the renewal process is plagued by the very same unconstitutional delays and the challenged laws provide no grace period for expired permits that are pending renewal. This new lawsuit requests the courts to step in and hold the commonwealth accountable for their tactics of unconstitutional burden and delay, and for the singling out of non-residents for particularly harsh treatment.

“Thanks to the Massachusetts permitting regime, non-residents who travel to – or even through – the state for business or vacation must follow the extremely long permit process or risk arrest and prosecution,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “The Second and Fourteenth Amendments clearly protect the right of ‘ordinary, law-abiding citizens’ to carry handguns for self-defense, and the state is violating the constitutional rights of non-residents with such a burdensome process to receive and renew a license to carry.” Read more

FPC is proud to Bolt Up for Mr. Perryman and the Second Amendment so that he and others can exercise their rights when, where, and how they choose.

LOS ANGELES – NFL veteran Denzel Perryman, a linebacker for the Los Angeles Chargers, was arrested last night in the Los Angeles area for exercising his constitutionally protected rights, according to TMZ. As reported by the outlet, “the NFL player was picked up by the South Los Angeles Sheriff’s Station officers Friday evening and booked on a felony charge of possessing an assault weapon.”

In response, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) noted that California’s ban on so-called ‘assault weapons’ was declared unconstitutional in October 2023 in FPC’s Miller v. Bonta case. However, the district court’s injunction has been stayed by the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, which has often used questionable maneuvers to prevent pro–Second Amendment decisions from taking effect.

FPC says that Los Angeles County District Attorney Nathan Hochman should put an end to the County’s enforcement of the ban. “District Attorney Hochman should dismiss the charges against Mr. Perryman, and everyone else affected by this unconstitutional and immoral law,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. “Law enforcement should not be putting people in cages for exercising their fundamental rights. This insanity must end, and it must end now.” Read more

BELLEVUE, Wash. —— Today, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), American Suppressor Association (ASA), National Rifle Association (NRA), Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), Prime Protection STL Tactical Boutique, and two members of the organizations filed a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA). The case, Brown v. ATF, was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri.

Until President Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBB), the NFA established a $200 tax and tax-enforcement registration regime on certain classes of firearms, including suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and NFA-defined “any other weapons.” With the elimination of this excise tax in the OBBB, the joint complaint alleges that the NFA registration regime is no longer justifiable as an exercise of Congress’s taxing power, nor any other Article I power.

The lawsuit also asserts that the NFA’s registration regime for suppressors and short-barreled rifles violates the Second Amendment. Read more