BELLEVUE, Wash. —— The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and its partners have filed their brief with the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in SAF’s challenge to Illinois’ assault weapons and magazine capacity bans.

SAF is joined in Harrel v. Raoul by the Illinois State Rifle Association, Firearms Policy Coalition, C4 Gun Store, Marengo Guns and Dane Harrel, for whom the lawsuit is named.

The case challenges the constitutionality of the Illinois assault weapons and magazine capacity bans, on the grounds that both modern semiautomatic rifles, and the standard capacity magazines that feed them, are overwhelmingly in common use for lawful purposes, including self-defense. Twice now, the District Court has agreed and ruled in SAF’s favor, first in granting a preliminary injunction, and then on the merits on remand. With a full trial record now before it, the Seventh Circuit has a second opportunity to properly apply the Heller/Bruen test and leave these Illinois statutes in the wastebin of history. Read more

CHICAGO – Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) asked the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold its critical victory over the Illinois “Protect Illinois Communities Act” (PICA) gun control regulations, which bans so-called “assault weapons” and “large capacity” magazines. FPC’s brief says that the “question presented by this case is whether the Second Amendment allows Illinois to ban the best-selling rifle in America and its standard magazine. The answer,” FPC argues, “is no.”

“We were glad but unsurprised that the district court ruled PICA unconstitutional after development and review of an extensive trial record. The Seventh Circuit should apply the Supreme Court’s straightforward test and uphold our victory in this case,” said FPC President Brandon Combs. Read more

Friday, the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) filed a Petition for Certiorari requesting that the U.S. Supreme Court hear a challenge to the National Firearms Act of 1934’s restrictions on short-barreled rifles in a case named Rush v. United States.

The NFA imposes tax and registration requirements on any rifle having a barrel shorter than 16 inches. A violation is punishable by up to 10 years’ imprisonment and a fine of up to $250,000, in addition to the forfeiture of the rifle. The Petition requests that the Supreme Court hear the case and hold the regulations unconstitutional.

“The National Firearms Act imposes burdens on law-abiding gun owners that have no grounding in the text, history, or tradition of the Second Amendment,” said Doug Hamlin, NRA Executive Vice President & CEO. “The Second Amendment guarantees the right of Americans to own commonly used firearms—including short-barreled rifles—without government interference, and we’re hopeful that the Supreme Court will use this opportunity to reaffirm that right.” Read more

The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) announced it will be partnering with the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine and Gun Owners of Maine in a legal challenge against Maine lawmakers who are blocking a statutorily mandated public hearing on the 2025 “Red Flag” Referendum question. Under Maine law, all ballot initiatives require a public hearing, unless 2/3 of both chambers vote to forego the process. To date, no such vote has occurred, and Democrat Judiciary Chair Senator Anne Carney continues to block the required hearing.

John Commerford, Executive Director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA), released the following statement announcing the legal action: “Progressive Portland politicians are forcing taxpayers to foot the bill to defend their unlawful efforts to silence the voices of Maine gun owners. The NRA is proud to join the Sportsman’s Alliance of Maine and Gun Owners of Maine in a legal challenge demanding a statutorily mandated public hearing on Michael Bloomberg’s radical ‘Red Flag’ referendum. To Speaker Fecteau, Senate President Daughtry, and Chair Carney, our message is simple: we will see you in court.”

WASHINGTON, D.C. — NSSF®, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, celebrates the U.S. Supreme Court’s unanimous 9-0 decision that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PCLAA) bars Mexico’s claims that firearm manufacturers “aided and abetted” illegal firearms trafficking to narco-terrorist drug cartels in Mexico.

“This is a tremendous victory for the firearm industry and the rule of law. For too long, gun control activists have attempted to twist basic tort law to malign the highly-regulated U.S. firearm industry with the criminal actions of violent organized crime, both here in the United States and abroad,” said NSSF’s Lawrence G. Keane, Senior Vice President and General Counsel. “The firearm industry is sympathetic to plight of those in Mexico who are victims of rampant and uncontrolled violence at the hands of narco-terrorist drug cartels. The firearm industry works closely with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to prevent the illegal straw purchasing of firearms and the illegal transnational smuggling of firearms. This unequivocal decision by the Supreme Court that PLCAA applies and there is no evidence whatsoever that U.S. manufacturers are in any way responsible is verification of commitment to responsible firearm ownership.”

The Court wrote in the unanimous decision, “Recall that Congress enacted the statute to halt a flurry of lawsuits attempting to make gun manufacturers pay for the downstream harms resulting from misuse of their products. Read more

NEW ORLEANS – Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced the filing of an important legal brief urging the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals to uphold a lower court’s decision dismissing the government’s case against someone charged with violating the federal ban on machine guns, ultimately holding that the ban cannot pass muster under the Second Amendment. FPC joined FPC Action Foundation (FPCAF) and the National Rifle Association of America (NRA) as parties to the brief.

“Heller already explored the relevant history and found that the only way to ban possession of a firearm is by demonstrating that it is ‘dangerous and unusual’ and therefore unprotected by the Second Amendment,” the brief explains. “Because the government did not demonstrate that machineguns are unusual it has not met its burden.”

“The Fifth Circuit should fully and faithfully apply the Supreme Court’s controlling Second Amendment test. The government did not meet its burden in this case, and the district court’s dismissal should be affirmed,” said FPC President Brandon Combs.

“The weapons at issue here are unquestionably bearable ‘arms,’ so the Court must perform the required historical inquiry. At that point, the relevant question is if machineguns are in common use for lawful purposes today,” explained attorney and FPCAF President Cody J. Wisniewski. “We hope the Fifth Circuit will consider the relevant history and affirm the district court’s decision.” Read more

The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms has taken direct action regarding proposed training mandates in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, by sending a letter to the Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety and Security (EOPSS), opposing the requirements.

CCRKBA board member John Petrolino’s letter reminds John H. Melander, Jr. at the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security in Boston that such a training requirement is unlikely to pass constitutional muster.

“There are no training mandates in order to exercise any other civil liberties enumerated by the U.S. Bill of Rights, and the Second Amendment should not be treated like a second class right,” Petrolino wrote. Read more

Gun Owners of America (GOA), Gun Owners Foundation (GOF), and Florida resident Richard Hughes have filed a motion for summary judgment in their federal lawsuit challenging Florida’s unconstitutional ban on the open carry of firearms.

This legal action seeks to have Florida Statute § 790.053(1), which criminalizes the open carry of handguns in public, declared unconstitutional. Plaintiffs argue that the ban blatantly violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments, especially following the U.S. Supreme Court’s rulings in Heller, Bruen, and Rahimi.

The case, Gun Owners of America v. Del Toro, is currently pending in the Southern District of Florida and represents a direct challenge to one of the few remaining open carry prohibitions in the country. If successful, the suit could restore open carry rights to millions of law-abiding Floridians.

Sam Paredes, on behalf of the Board of Directors for Gun Owners Foundation, issued the following statement: “Florida’s open carry ban is an outdated and unconstitutional relic. The right to bear arms means exactly that—to carry arms, not just to keep them locked away. GOF and GOA are proud to stand with Floridians demanding their rights back, and we are confident the court will recognize the Second Amendment doesn’t stop at concealment.” Read more

NSSF®, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, is disappointed by the U.S. Supreme Court decision this morning not to hear the appeals in Snope v. Brown and in the NSSF-funded Ocean State Tactical v. Rhode Island cases challenging on Second Amendment grounds Maryland’s ban on Modern Sporting Rifles (MSRs) and Rhode Island’s ban on standard sized magazines, respectively.

We respectfully disagree with Justice Brett Kavanagh’s statement respecting the denial of cert in the Snope case that the Court should wait a “Term or two” before taking action to stop the lower courts from misapplying the Court’s holding Heller and Bruen to deny the Second Amendment rights of millions of law-abiding Americans living in the states that have enacted laws banning MSRs and magazines.

NSSF agrees with the view expressed by Justice Clarence Thomas in his dissent from the denial of cert in the Snope case. He wrote he “would not wait to decide whether the government can ban the most popular rifle in America. That question is of critical importance to tens of millions of law-abiding AR–15 owners throughout the country. [The Supreme Court has] avoided deciding it for a full decade [citation omitted]. And, further percolation is of little value when lower courts in the jurisdictions that ban AR–15s appear bent on distorting this Court’s Second Amendment precedents. [citations omitted]. I doubt we would sit idly by if lower courts were to so subvert our precedents involving any other constitutional right. Until we are vigilant in enforcing it, the right to bear arms will remain ‘a second-class right.’”

About NSSF

NSSF is the trade association for the firearm industry. Its mission is to promote, protect and preserve hunting and the shooting sports. Formed in 1961, NSSF has over 10,0000 members including manufacturers, distributors, firearms retailers, shooting ranges, sportsmen’s organizations and publishers nationwide. For more information, visit nssf.org.