Just as it was initially unclear why the CDC removed the estimate, it’s unclear why it has brought it back. As our reporting showed in 2022, a political pressure campaign led to its removal. CDC hasn’t said what led to its return.

Michigan’s Democratic Senate nominee was back in the news this week. He was asked about his 2023 comments proposing replacing the Second Amendment and seemingly doubled down, despite the initial attempt to hide those comments. His approach hasn’t been too far off from other battleground Democrats, which made me look at what we should expect to happen to gun politics if they win.

Meanwhile, the federal courts were busy as well. In Massachusetts, a federal judge upheld the state’s under-21 handgun and semi-auto ban. In the “ghost gun” kit ban challenge, another federal judge struck down the rule despite the Supreme Court upholding it 15 months prior.

Plus, crime data analyst Jeff Asher explains on the podcast how we hit an all-time low in murder. And we have a bunch of stories down in the links, including a report that hackers breached the ATF’s systems.

CDC Restores Gun Defensive Use Estimates to Website Years After Removing Them Under Political Pressure
By Stephen Gutowski

The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) has reposted a broad estimate of the number of times Americans use firearms to defend themselves, several years after it was removed following private complaints from gun-control advocates.

The CDC website now includes a reference to Defensive Gun Use (DGU) estimates for the first time since The Reload broke news about the reason for their removal in 2022. The message on the agency’s site about firearm injury and death is identical to the one that was taken down. It includes DGU estimates at both ends of the spectrum, based on a 2013 Institute of Medicine study.

“Estimates of defensive gun use vary depending on the questions asked, populations studied, timeframe, and other factors related to study design,” the CDC site reads once more. “The report Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence indicates a range of 60,000 to 2.5 million defensive gun uses each year.”

Click here to read more.

Michigan Senate Democratic Nominee Declines to Disavow Proposal to Replace Americans’ Gun Rights
By Alejandra O’Connell-Domenech

Abdul El-Sayed has seemingly doubled down on a past statement that the Second Amendment should be replaced with a right to healthcare.

El-Sayed, who won the Democratic nomination for the US Senate earlier this month, declined to say in a Monday interview whether he believes the right to keep and bear arms should be deleted from the United States Constitution despite backing it in a resurfaced 2023 video. El-Sayed avoided answering the question directly, but didn’t disavow the idea either.

“You said you want to replace the right to bear arms with the right to health care,” Fox News commentator Jesse Watters asked in a clip posted to social media by the Republican Party’s research arm and several gun-rights groups. “You don’t want to replace the Second Amendment, do you?”

“Well, look, man, I think more people are more worried about whether or not they can see a doctor than whether or not they can have a gun,” El-Sayed responded. “I’m just putting that out there. If you disagree with me on that, go ahead and poll it, alright?”

“You’re dodging the question,” Watters said. “Do you want to replace the Second Amendment?”

Click here to read the rest.

Analysis: What Happens if Swing State Democrats Don’t Moderate on Guns and Still Win? [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

Democrats in key midterm races aren’t rushing to reassure voters they don’t want new gun control, and that could change politics if they prevail anyway.

This week, Michigan Senate nominee Abdul El-Sayed continued the trend by seemingly doubling down on his pitch to replace the Second Amendment. When asked if he stood by his remarks in a 2023 video proposing to swap out the Second Amendment for a healthcare guarantee, he didn’t say no. Instead, he reiterated the idea that’s what most people actually want.

He isn’t necessarily alone in deciding not to abandon his earlier gun positions, either. Democrats from Maine to Michigan to Texas are declining to moderate on guns ahead of the midterms. They appear comfortable holding positions that seem to be to the left of their electorate on guns.

Perhaps, in what are shaping up to be close races, that will cost them (at least one recent poll gives Republicans an edge on gun policy). But what will it do to the political landscape if it doesn’t?

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access!

Federal Judge Upholds Massachusetts Under-21 Semi-Auto Sales Ban
By Julie Miller

A Massachusetts law barring people under 21 years old from possessing a handgun or semi-automatic firearm is constitutional.

That was the ruling US District Judge George O’Toole issued on Friday. His decision in Escher v. Noble rejected a challenge mounted by the National Rifle Association and other gun-rights organizations on behalf of a 20-year-old Massachusetts resident named Mark Escher who wanted to possess a semi-automatic rifle and a handgun. Like other judges who have upheld similar laws, O’Toole relied on a founding-era legal concept known as the “infancy doctrine” in agreeing with the state that the law passes muster under the Supreme Court’s ruling in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, which requires modern firearms laws to be consistent with the nation’s historical traditions.

“The historical record before the Court reveals that the ‘pre-existing right’ ‘codif[ied]’ by the Second Amendment tolerated restrictions on minors’ ability to possess and carry firearms,” wrote O’Toole. “The statutory age restriction fits within that principle — distilled from our Founding-era regulatory tradition — in both why and how it burdens the Second Amendment right of eighteen- to twenty-year-olds.”

Click here to read more.

Podcast: Murder Hits All-Time Low (Ft. AH Datalytic’s Jeff Asher) [Member Early Access]
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, the FBI released its latest crime data report, and the news was good.

Murder fell faster than at any point in history, and it hit an all-time low last year. To explain the details of what’s in the agency’s report, we have one of the most prominent crime data analysts in the country: Jeff Asher.

Asher runs AH Datalytics and tracks real-time crime data. He has been predicting since last year the FBI’s numbers would come in pretty much exactly where they did. Still, he said it’s impossible to understate the recent trend. We’ve gone from relative stability in the murder rate to a massive surge to an even greater climbdown.

Now, we’ve reached an all-time low. And Asher said the decline hasn’t stopped. The data he’s gathered, which correlates closely with the FBI’s data, indicates the murder rate is still falling in 2026. And the drop-off has been consistent across the nation and across demographics.

He said that defies the simplest partisan explanations for the decline. Asher explained his preferred theory for why this is all happening, but he also admitted it’s impossible to say for sure at this point.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel. An auto-generated transcript is available here. Reload Members can listen on Sunday, as always. Everyone else can listen on Monday.

Plus, reporter Julie Miller and I cover an exclusive interview with a startup founder who says he’s developed software to block 3D printers from producing gun parts. We also discuss the DOJ’s new gun-rights restoration rule. Plus, we hear from Reload Member Rob in our latest member segment!

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: Why a Federal Judge Tossed the ‘Ghost Gun’ Kit Rule After SCOTUS Upheld It [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) greenlit the “ghost gun” kit ban last year. So, why did a federal judge just strike it down?

On Monday, US District Judge Reed O’Connor tossed the Biden-era Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) rule classifying unfinished frames and receivers sold alongside jigs and finishing tools the same as functioning guns. That came about 15 months after a 7-2 SCOTUS majority upheld it. And it all came in the same case.

While the name has changed as some plaintiffs dropped off and the government defendants were swapped out, Defense Distributed v. Blanche is a continuation of Bondi v. VanDerStok. So, what changed?

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access!

Outside The Reload

ATF confirms breach hours after Qilin ransomware gang claims US firearms agency | Cybernews | By Stefanie Schappert

Push for Online Gun Sales Meets a Surprising Opponent: Small Gun Dealers | The New York Times | By Aishvarya Kavi

DOJ silence in major gun cases tests Second Amendment advocates’ trust in Trump | The Washington Examiner | By Kaelan Deese and Jack Birle

Stay order issued in Virginia’s assault weapons ban case | ABC13 News | By WSET Staff

Alibaba and the $40 gun | Open Source Defense

Jury finds Albany man guilty on all counts in ghost gun case | The Times Union | By Patrick Tine

Owning a Gun Could Soon Require Mandatory Training in California | Bearing Arms | By Cam Edwards

Dolly Parton Shares how gun story from 9 to 5 came from her own experience | The Nashville Soundbite

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

Lawmakers in some of America’s most populous states, including New York and California, are looking to ban the sale of 3D printers that aren’t equipped with gun-part-filtering tech. The biggest obstacle in that push has been the lack of such technology. But that may soon change--at least, if the head of a startup who spoke to The Reload is to be believed.

Sentinel is a new software whose developer claims can block 3D printers from processing a plethora of gun designs, even ones it hasn’t seen before, without calls to AI models or remote databases. 3D-printed-gun enthusiasts tell The Reload the claims are plausible, but they also detail why the overall attempt to block gun files won’t be as simple as Sentinel may believe.

Meanwhile, the Department of Justice made news this week by finally revealing its final rule on federal gun-rights restoration. And the FBI reported the murder rate hit an all-time-low last year.

Plus, I explain why the recent injunction against the NFA is big but brittle. And SAF’s Kostas Moros joins the podcast to detail who and what it covers. We also have a bunch of stories down in the links, including one on a federal judge tossing the “ghost gun” kit ban.

I also want to highlight that we made the top section of the media bias chart at Ad Fontes Media again this month, which is used by universities and companies, including Ground News, to evaluate sources. They only give that rating to publications they’ve judged “to be fact-based and minimally biased.” The Reload is one of just 45 sources they gave the top rating!

Exclusive: New Company Says It’s Developed Gun-Part Blocker for 3D Printers
By Stephen Gutowski

American lawmakers are looking for ways to stop 3D printers from making gun parts. A new startup in India believes it has developed a solution.

Earlier this year, New York passed a law ordering an investigation into the feasibility of gun-part-blocking tech, which could lead to such tech becoming mandated. Politicians in several other states are considering the same thing. Rachit Bhojani, a 23-year-old print-farm operator in Mumbai, India, says his new startup has already created an on-printer filtering software that goes beyond basic file matching with over a 99% success rate across upwards of a million tests.

“At this point, I wouldn’t say that I am very far from production,” Bhojani, owner and developer of Sentinel, told The Reload in an exclusive interview. “If someone wanted to deploy this, I can deploy tomorrow.”

Click here to read more.

Startup Founder Describes How His Gun Filter for 3D Printers Works. Enthusiasts Explain Why It Might Not. [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

A recent college graduate and Indian 3D-print-farm owner claims his new software company can block printers from processing gun files, but not everyone is convinced.

Rachit Bhojani spoke exclusively with The Reload about his new startup, Sentinel, that’s likely to cast a big shadow over America’s debate on homemade firearms. He says the Sentinel software blocks gun files, even when it hasn’t encountered them before, all while leaving a light touch and a minimal false-positive rate.

“The firearm-blueprint firewall for 3D printers,” is how the company’s website puts it. “Sentinel screens every print job on the printer itself — detecting and blocking firearm blueprints before a single layer is laid down, while keeping every other file private and every legitimate print untouched.”

But what are the ins and outs of how that all works? And will it actually be effective? Bhojani and a group of 3D-printed-gun activists who reviewed his company’s claims weigh in on the gritty details.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access!

DOJ Finalizes Gun-Rights Restoration Process
By Alejandra O’Connell-Domenech

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has finalized a long-awaited process for offering some Americans barred from possessing firearms under federal law a pathway to own them again.

On Monday, DOJ released its final rule to the public. It requires applicants to submit records, fingerprints, three character references, and other information before the DOJ can determine whether they pose a danger to others and whether restoring their firearms rights would be in the public interest. Only invited candidates will be able to access applications this fall before the DOJ expands the process to the general public, but it expects upwards of 330,000 people to apply within the first year of operation.

“The Second Amendment is not a second-class right, and the federal government should not permanently deprive Americans of a constitutional right without regard to whether they pose a danger to public safety,” Attorney General Todd Blanche said in a statement. “This rule establishes a rigorous, commonsense process that protects the public while giving deserving Americans a real path to restoration.”

Click here to read more.

FBI: Murder Rate Hits All-Time Low
By Julie Miller

Violent crime plunged between 2024 and 2025, with the murder rate reaching record lows.

The violent crime rate dropped 9.7 percent in that time span, the largest annual drop the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) has noted since it began reporting crime statistics in 1936, according to data it released on Friday. Murder and non-negligent manslaughter dropped 18.1 percent -- the largest single-year decrease on record. The US murder rate continued to fall from its recent pandemic peaks, down 18.5 percent.

“The 2025 murder rate of 4.1 per 100,000 inhabitants is tied with 1955 and 1956 for the lowest murder rate,” the FBI said in a statement.

Click here to read the rest.

Podcast: How Far Does the Injunction Against the National Firearms Act Extend? (Ft. SAF’s Kostas Moros)
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, we’re diving back into the injunction against enforcement of wide swaths of the National Firearms Act (NFA).

That’s because, in a bit of a surprise move, the Department of Justice (DOJ) declined to appeal the injunction before the stay on it expired. That led to a symbolic sale of an unregistered silencer between several of the named plaintiffs in the case early Thursday morning. But it has also created a lot of new questions about exactly who and what is covered by the injunction.

To try and bring some clarity to the issue, we’ve got gun-rights lawyer and Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) legal research director Kostas Moros back on the show. SAF is a named plaintiff in a similar case in the Eighth Circuit, and its sister organization, the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, is a plaintiff in the Texas case. Kostas said the injunction is fairly complex and nobody has all the answers for every potential eventuality.

However, he also said that the ruling appears to be very expansive. He said it enjoins enforcement of many of the NFA regulations associated with silencers, short barrel rifles, short barrel shotguns, and the “any other weapon” category. He said it also covers all named plaintiffs, including all of their members and customers. And it covers both current and future members and customers.

Kostas noted there are a number of caveats, though. For instance, he said it doesn’t have any impact on state laws, and many of those could still trip people up. He also said it doesn’t cover the entire NFA or even all of the NFA’s regulations on the impacted items. He argued there’s a lot still left to figure out, and the final answers for many of the open questions will have to come from the DOJ and ATF.

Kostas also discussed the legal strategy at play, including what he’d like to see the DOJ do with a potential appeal and how vulnerable the current legal situation may be.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel. An auto-generated transcript is available here. Reload Members can listen on Sunday, as always. Everyone else can listen on Monday.

Plus, I cover the first legal unregistered silencer sale in nearly 100 years. Then I discuss newly unearthed videos of Abdul El-Sayed, the Michigan Democratic Senate candidate, where he proposes replacing the Second Amendment. I also explain a new federal court ruling on whether the Second Amendment protects unauthorized gun exports. Plus, I look at reports on a settlement between DOJ and the LA County Sheriff’s Office as well as a new DOJ opinion on the Post Office gun ban.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: A Big, Brittle Win Against the NFA [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

The first lawful sale of an unregistered silencer happened this week as the result of a legal victory. Gun-rights activists across the country were excited about the win, and reasonably so, but it’s worth understanding the legal and political risks the new status quo faces.

Early Thursday, plaintiffs from Silencer Shop v. ATF gathered in Texas to transfer a silencer. That came after US District Judge James Wesley Hendrix issued an injunction earlier this month, and the Department of Justice (DOJ) failed to appeal his decision before the stay lapsed. While the DOJ and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) are enjoined from enforcing much of the National Firearms Act (NFA) against a wide swath of the public, the legal protections are both a bit murky and brittle.

For one, the injunction’s future is partially dependent on inaction from the DOJ itself. The ruling only went into effect because the DOJ didn’t appeal before Judge Hendrix’s seven-day stay expired. One Republican Congressman has said the Trump Administration told him DOJ isn’t going to appeal the decision, while an unnamed DOJ spokesperson told The New York Times the Department is merely not going to request a stay of the injunction if and when it does appeal.

So, there’s good reason to think the DOJ may still appeal the decision. That’s not what some gun-rights activists want to see, though there may be some upside to it.

As things stand now, the suppression of many NFA provisions for many Americans (even if the exact scope remains unclear) is the result of a single district court ruling and a strategic DOJ decision to allow it to go into effect. That ruling is also built on fairly shaky foundations. While the decision is coherent and many gun-rights advocates are likely to agree with it (the entire gun-rights movement is backing this or one of the other similar challenges after all), it’s not clear how much purchase it will have in the broader judiciary.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access!

Outside The Reload

Federal Judge Rules ATF Frame-and-Receiver Rule Unconstitutional in Defense Distributed Case | Ammoland | By John Crump

How Republicans Embraced Brandon Herrera, a Texas Republican Candidate and Gun Influencer | The New York Times | By Bayliss Wagner

DOJ Pardon Attorney Explains New Rights Restoration Process | Cam & Co | By Cam Edwards

Premier, PM announce post Bondi Beach terror attack gun buyback scheme | Australian Broadcasting Corporation | By ABC Staff

Code, Speech, Ghost Guns, and the First Amendment | Duke Center for Firearms Law | By Helen Norton

One of world’s oldest orca whales found with possible shotgun wounds as officials launch investigation | Fox News | By Stepheny Price

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

The midnight meetup of several plaintiffs from the lawsuit resulted in a monumental shift in federal gun laws. The NFA has been hollowed out in many respects. Although, as I explain for Reload Members, exactly how far the injunction extends in practice is a bit confusing to parse.

Meanwhile, we have another story about a prominent Democratic nominee’s newly unearthed comments on the Second Amendment. This time, it’s from Abdul El-Sayed in Michigan, who previously pushed to replace the right to keep and bear arms with the right to healthcare. Freelance reporter Alejandra O’Connell-Domenech has exclusive new quotes from El-Sayed’s 2023 comments and a response from his campaign on what he believes today.

The Third Circuit also made news this week when it delivered the first post-Bruen appeals court opinion on whether gun export restrictions are still constitutional. A three-judge panel unanimously upheld a Pennsylvania man’s conviction for trafficking guns to Haiti after deciding whether his actions were protected by the Second Amendment and whether that ultimately mattered.

Meanwhile, gun-rights lawyer Kostas Moros analyzes the history of armed travel in the United States as the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) moves to rework modern travel regulations. He argues travelers actually traditionally enjoyed greater gun protections than others and cites dozens of laws from the early American period as evidence.

Plus, FRAC president and NFA case plaintiff Travis White explains on the podcast how his group convinced a federal judge to strike down wide swaths of the law. And we have a bunch more stories down in the links, including the first settlement in one of the DOJ’s Second Amendment lawsuits.

Gun Group, Republican Candidate Transfer Unregistered Silencer as DOJ Misses Appeal Deadline
By Stephen Gutowski

In an act nearly 1oo years in the making, a silencer has been legally transferred between two parties without being registered under the National Firearms Act (NFA).

On Thursday, Gun Owners of America (GOA), Guntuber-turned-congressional-candidate Brandon Herrera (R.), and Silencer Shop joined forces to finalize the transaction. Herrera and another Republican official bought silencers from Silencer Shop while being members of GOA and without filling out the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) registration form required for nearly the last century. They were confident the move was doubly covered by an injunction issued last week by US District Judge James Hendrix, which the Department of Justice (DOJ) failed to appeal before the end of a seven-day stay.

“It is 12:01 am on August 13th, 2026. @TheAKGuy & @WesVirdellTX are purchasing the first unregistered suppressors from @SilencerShop,” GOA posted online. “These GOA members will not be filing a Form 4 or complying with the other enjoined provisions of the National Firearms Act.”

Click here to read more.

Analysis: Who and What is Covered by the NFA Injunction? [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

Last week, a federal judge struck down much of the National Firearms Act (NFA). This week, his injunction went into effect. But there’s some confusion around what exactly that means.

The Department of Justice (DOJ) failed to file an appeal of US District Judge James Wesley Hendrix’s ruling by Wednesday. So, the seven-day stay Judge Hendrix issued on his injunction lapsed. That’s why we saw the first lawful unregistered silencer transfer in nearly 100 years happen between some of the plaintiffs at midnight.

But how far beyond that symbolic transaction does Judge Hendrix’s injunction extend?

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access!

Michigan’s Democratic Senate Candidate Floated Replacing the Second Amendment
By Alejandra O’Connell-Domenech

Abdul El-Sayed suggested in a now-removed video that the right to keep and bear arms should be swapped out for a right to healthcare.

The Senate hopeful from Michigan deleted or made private several old YouTube videos that contained controversial comments. Those videos, unearthed on Tuesday, included a 2023 discussion about eliminating the Second Amendment.

“I want to propose something,” El-Sayed said in a since-removed video posted on April 6, 2023, titled ̶T̶h̶e̶̶ R̶i̶g̶h̶t̶̶ t̶o̶̶ B̶e̶a̶r̶̶ A̶r̶m̶s̶̶ The Right to Have Healthcare! “What if we tweaked the Constitution? Amended the amendment, and instead of the right to bear arms, we change it to the right to have health care.”

Click here for more.

Federal Appeals Court Upholds Pennsylvania Man’s Conviction for Unauthorized Gun Shipment to Haiti
By Julie Miller

Gun trafficking isn’t protected by the Second Amendment.

That’s the conclusion a Third Circuit panel reached on Monday. The panel rejected the appeal of a man who argued that the laws he broke in shipping nine handguns to Haiti without documentation infringed on his right to keep and bear arms. The unanimous decision, written by Judge David Porter, affirmed that the Arms Export Control Act’s permitting the President to designate “defense articles” for export control does not violate the Constitution’s restrictions on delegating legislative authority.

“We agree with the government that ‘keep[ing] and bear[ing] Arms’ does not encompass sending them abroad in violation of arms-trafficking laws,” Judge Porter wrote in US v. Clerfe.

Click here to read more.

Podcast: How Gun-Rights Advocates Convinced a Judge the National Firearms Act is Unconstitutional (Ft. FRAC’s Travis White)
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, we’re taking a close look at a federal judge’s decision to strike down a wide swath of National Firearms Act (NFA) regulations.

To do that, we have one of the plaintiffs in the case. Travis White is the President of the Firearms Regulatory Accountability Coalition (FRAC), which filed suit against the NFA the same day the federal government officially slashed a number of NFA taxes to $0. He said that’s what made the NFA vulnerable to a challenge, at least the provisions that regulate silencers, short-barrel rifles and shotguns, and what the law calls “any other weapons.”

US District Judge James Wesley Hendrix agreed. He ruled that the NFA sections whose taxes were eliminated also lost their constitutional justification. White said the judge was persuaded by the plaintiffs’ argument that the NFA is, at its heart, an exercise of Congress’s taxing power and its provisions can only stand if they are in furtherance of collecting revenue.

White said Hendrix agreed with FRAC that a $0 tax can’t justify imposing registration, fingerprinting, and various other requirements to prove it has been paid. White argued that if a tax doesn’t even try to raise funds, then it can’t be considered a tax. Hendrix was persuaded.

But that didn’t end the inquiry. White said the judge also determined the remaining NFA taxes on machineguns or gun makers don’t mean the regulations on the untaxed items can stand. He also brushed aside a justification based on the Necessary and Proper Clause. And he concluded the NFA doesn’t fit under the federal government’s power to regulate interstate commerce either.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel. An auto-generated transcript is available here. Reload Members can listen on Sunday, as always. Everyone else can listen on Monday.

Plus, I detail the latest on gun sales spiking in Colorado ahead of the state’s new permit-to-purchase law going into effect on The News Update Podcast. I also explain the Department of Justice’s new case against Montgomery County, Maryland’s broad “gun-free zone” restrictions and a dueling set of rulings on foster parents and gun storage requirements. Then I interview David from The Humble Marksman on why he believes the industry’s latest handgun trend may be running out of steam and what might come next.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: History Suggests Armed Travelers Enjoyed Expansive Protections [Member Exclusive]
By Kostas Moros

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) is currently considering expanding modern protections for traveling across state lines with firearms. A detailed look at the history suggests that would be a return to, rather than a departure from, how America has traditionally handled the issue.

This week, the public comment period on ATF’s Rulemaking Package, which it dubbed a “New Era of Reform,” comes to a close. It features two rules that deal with transporting guns. The first is called “Clarifying Interstate Transportation of Firearms Under the Gun Control Act,” and the other is “Interstate Transport and Temporary Export of National Firearms Act Firearms.”

So, let’s take a close look at how these rules fit into America’s historical tradition. After all, that’s how the standard the Supreme Court has adopted for judging modern gun regulations ever since 2022’s New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen. Plus, the history is fairly easy to discern in this case.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access!

Outside The Reload

Feds settle lawsuit with L.A. County Sheriff’s Department over concealed firearm permits | The Los Angeles Times | By Connor Sheets

DOJ Says Post Office Carry Ban Contradicts Federal Law | Bearing Arms | By Cam Edwards

Taking Weight-Loss Drugs Could Help Reduce Violent Impulses | The Trace | By Fairriona Magee and Chip Brownlee

NRA Joins Legal Fight Against Colorado’s Permit-to-Purchase Law for Semiautomatic Firearms | NRA-ILA

Ninth Circuit Forced to Deliver Rare Second Amendment Win Against Hawaii’s ‘Vampire Rule’ | AmmoLand | By John Crump

‘Fireworks suck’: Removed El-Sayed videos urged getting rid of the 4th of July tradition, raised replacing 2nd Amendment | CNN | By Andrew Kaczynski

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

That’s what gun-rights advocates have argued in court at the very least. And, this week, the first judge to rule on the theory found it persuasive. A federal district judge in the Fifth Circuit ruled the untaxed parts of the NFA are no longer a valid exercise of any federal power. And, as I explain in a piece for Reload Members, he went through and considered a list of other powers before reaching his conclusion.

While the Department of Justice lost that case, it also started a new one that’s more likely to make gun-rights activists happy. They sued a Maryland County over its expansive ‘Gun-Free Zones.” It’s part of expanding Second Amendment litigation from the Department’s Civil Rights Division.

Meanwhile, in Virginia, it appears the fight over the AR-15 restrictions has been put on hold--with ARs back on shelves for the foreseeable future. Still, their brief absence likely helped drive down gun sales in the state. The sales momentum seems to have jumped to Colorado, though, as gun owners there faced down their own impending AR-15 restrictions.

We also saw dueling rulings around gun storage requirements for foster parents in Illinois and Wisconsin. A federal judge and a state appeals court came to opposite conclusions on similar gun restrictions.

Plus, CATO Institute scholar Ilya Somin gives a pro-gun critique of the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment test on the podcast. And we have a bunch of stories down in the links, including an interview with the man who shot back at the In-n-Out shooter in Idaho.

Federal Judge Rules Congress Forfeited Power to Regulate Silencers, Short-Barrel Firearms by Cutting Taxes to $0
By Stephen Gutowski

Broad swaths of the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) are now unconstitutional, a federal judge in Texas has ruled.

On Wednesday, US District Judge James Wesley Hendrix noted portions of the NFA no longer collect tax revenue as a result of cuts in last year’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA). He concluded that meant those portions of the federal law could no longer be justified as a lawful exercise of Congress’s taxing authority. Therefore, he ruled, the registration requirements and other regulations on items like silencers and short-barrel rifles that are ostensibly justified as part of the tax collection process are now void.

“Because today’s NFA does not generate any revenue from untaxed firearms, its regulatory provisions cannot be upheld under the taxing power,” Judge Hendrix wrote in Silencer Shop v. ATF. “And there is no sign in the NFA’s text, structure, or statutory history that Congress invoked any other power in crafting the NFA provisions at issue. Thus, the regulatory provisions must be enjoined as unconstitutional because they exceed Congress’s enumerated powers.”

Click here to read the rest.

Analysis: Why a Federal Judge Just Struck Down Most of the NFA [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

The first judge to rule on a tax authority challenge to the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA) has sided with the gun-rights challengers.

Those challengers overcame what a number of experts have described as long odds by winning a permanent injunction against much of the NFA on Wednesday. US District Judge James Wesley Hendrix broadly ruled that Congress’s decision to slash the NFA tax on silencers, short-barrel rifles and shotguns undermined its constitutional basis. That, he decided, meant at least those portions of the law could no longer stand.

But he took 66 pages to get ot that conclusion, and he addressed the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) numerous defenses along the way. So, let’s take a close look at the details of the ruling.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read more. If not, buy a membership today to support our work and get exclusive access!

DOJ Sues Maryland County Over Expansive ‘Gun-Free’ Zones
By Stephen Gutowski

The Department of Justice (DOJ) wants Montgomery County’s gun-carry restrictions struck down, even in their newly shrunken form.

On Monday, the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division accused the Maryland county of still running afoul of the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment test. In a complaint filed in federal court, the DOJ alleged the county is engaging in a pattern and practice of violating its residents’ gun rights. It argued the new restrictions, which represent a toned-down version of a previous court-rebuked effort, were still too onerous.

“The Second Amendment does not allow local governments to ban law-abiding citizens from carrying firearms in public places as they go about their daily lives,” Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon said in a statement. “Montgomery County makes it almost impossible for a law-abiding citizen with a valid carry license to walk down the street and avoid these exclusion zones.”

Click here to read more.

Colorado Gun Sales Spike 250 Percent Ahead of AR-15 Restrictions as Virginia’s Surge Fades
By James Brown

Background checks on gun sales continued climbing nationwide in July, but as always, it’s a different tale depending on where you live.

Colorado and Virginia are at different points on the same path of increased gun regulation, and their residents responded accordingly. Colorado saw a dramatic rush in sales-related checks ahead of new age and rifle restrictions, while Virginia’s surge cooled as its AR-15 ban went into effect--if only briefly.

To estimate monthly gun transactions, the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) filters FBI National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) data to remove millions of permit and administrative checks and isolate those most closely tied to firearm sales. The gun industry group reported 1,061,883 sales checks nationwide in July 2026, an 8.5 percent increase over July 2025. Within that national uptick, Colorado stood out: the state recorded 82,103 sales-related checks in July, up from 22,507 a year earlier, a 264 percent jump, while Virginia’s gun-sales spike, which saw checks double year-over-year in May and June, has since ebbed.

NSSF spokesperson Mark Olivia argued Colorado’s surge is directly tied to looming restrictions on popular semi-automatic rifles, which went into effect on August 1st.

Click here to read more.

Courts Issue Dueling Decisions on Foster Parents and Guns
By Alejandra O’Connell-Domenech

Two judges considering cases on firearm restrictions for foster parents reached conflicting conclusions this week, underscoring ongoing legal disagreements on how the 2nd Amendment applies to those caring for children.

On Monday, US District Judge Sue Myerscough ruled that Illinois’ firearms storage restrictions for foster homes and licensed in-home day cares are constitutional. Meanwhile, on July 31, a Wisconsin state appeals court unanimously struck down a similar requirement that foster parents keep firearms unloaded.

“The Court finds that the plain text of the Second Amendment covers the Day Care Home Rule and the Foster Home Rule, that day care homes and foster homes are sensitive places analogous to schools where firearms may be restricted, and, therefore, that the Day Care Home Rule and the Foster Home Rule restricting firearms kept in day care homes and foster homes, respectively, are constitutional,” Judge Myerscough wrote in Miller v. Mueller.

“We conclude that the Laffertys did not waive their Second Amendment constitutional right by volunteering to serve the community and help traumatized children by becoming foster parents,” Judge Maria S. Lazar wrote for the Wisconsin court in Lafferty v. Pertl.

Click here to read the rest.

Podcast: A Pro-Gun Critique of the SCOTUS Second Amendment Test (Ft. GMU Professor Ilya Somin)
By Stephen Gutowski

We’ve looked at the Supreme Court’s upcoming Second Amendment case against AR-15 bans with the lawyer who helped craft the Court’s view of gun rights and with a professor who is a prominent critic of that view from the left. This week, we’re doing the same with a pro-gun critic of the Court’s test.

That critic is Cato Institute scholar and George Mason University law professor Ilya Somin. Ever since the Supreme Court handed down a new Second Amendment test in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, most gun-rights advocates have been happy with the outcome of the cases where the Court has applied it. But there is a contingent of pro-gun lawyers and professors who’ve disputed whether it’s a good precedent.

Somin argued that Bruen‘s reliance on history and tradition creates a lot of grey areas in the law. He said it is “too flabby” as it stands now, and leaves too much wiggle room for judges to impose their own preferences. He noted that liberal critics of the Bruen test have some valid critiques, but where they worry the test will be used to restrict government action, he worries it will be used to restrict Second Amendment rights.

He said he’s largely agreed with the outcome of the most recent Second Amendment cases at the Supreme Court, but worried what might come in future cases--especially if the balance of the Court moves left. Somin argued for what he considers a more straightforward test based around the original meaning of the Second Amendment. He argued history could inform that meaning, but he said that the existence of historical laws that contradict that meaning shouldn’t mean those laws take precedence over the meaning itself.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel. An auto-generated transcript is here. Reload Members get access on Sunday, as always. Everyone else can listen on Monday.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss a sweeping new ruling out of Connecticut, where a federal judge upheld the state’s handgun restrictions for 18-20-year-olds shortly after the Supreme Court declined to address the issue. We also cover a new stay order in the state litigation against Virginia’s AR-15 ban, which will keep the ban blocked until the Supreme Court hands down its “assault weapon” ban decision.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: Is the Virginia AR-15 Ban Fight Already Over? [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

A state judge effectively froze the legal battle over Virginia’s “assault firearms” and “high-capacity” magazine ban this week. But filings from a sister case provide further insight into whether the fight is actually over for now.

On Wednesday, Washington County Circuit Judge Jeffrey L. Campbell issued a stay enshrining his statewide preliminary injunction against enforcement of the law until the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decides its own “assault weapons” case next year. That puts Santolla v. Katz on ice for the foreseeable future--unless Virginia officials decide to appeal.

The most recent filings in Santolla‘s sister case, Crump v. Katz, show where state officials are on that question and how much their view has changed in a few short weeks.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access!

Outside The Reload

Hero bystander speaks out after confronting In-N-Out gunman | Good Morning America | By Trevor Ault

Inside a Mass Shooter’s Harrowing History With ChatGPT | Mother Jones | By Mark Follman

First Look: CMP M14 Rifles | GunDigest | By Adam Borisenko

The court’s big gun cases – and what’s next | SCOTUSblog | By Alex Rivenbark

Murders at lowest level ‘in recorded history’ over first three months of 2026, NYPD says | Spectrum News | By Atlan Hassard

Orthodox Synagogue Sues MoCo Over Firearms Restrictions Near Houses of Worship | Washington Jewish Week | By Jessica Russak-Hoffman

The Pew Pew Jew Needed Armed Security at GOALS | The Dana Loesch Show

Second Amendment Advocates Declare Victory in Lawsuit Over L.A. Sheriff’s Carry Policies | Bearing Arms | By Cam Edwards

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

As Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman explains, that judge upheld both the federal restrictions on handgun sales to those under-21 and Connecticut’s total ban on ownership. He walks through how she reached that conclusion, and, in a piece for Reload Members, how it differs from what other lower courts have held.

Meanwhile, Jake also takes a look at a potentially monumental Fifth Circuit decision to rehear a challenge to the legal theory that underpins most federal gun laws. A pair of new polls provide insight into how guns might advantage Republicans in the upcoming midterms--as well as why they might not. And a Virginia judge froze a case against the state’s AR-15 ban, with the law’s enforcement blocked until SCOTUS enters its decision on the ban.

Plus, Virginia Citizen Defense League president Philip Van Cleave joins the podcast to explain the state of the legal fight over the AR ban and what comes next. We also have several more stories down in the links, including a piece I just did for The Washington Post on how the ban has backfired on Virginia Democrats.

District Judge Upholds Federal, Connecticut Under-21 Handgun Restrictions
By Jake Fogleman

Both the federal government and state governments may restrict young adults’ ability to obtain, possess, or carry firearms, a federal judge has ruled.

US District Judge Sarala Nagala on Thursday upheld the federal ban on federally licensed firearms dealers selling handguns to adults under the age of 21. She likewise upheld Connecticut’s broader state restrictions, which also collectively bar the same age group from being able to possess or carry handguns. Nagala did so after determining that modern weapons restrictions for 18-to-20-year-olds are sufficiently rooted in history.

“Having considered all the admissible testimony of the witnesses and all the admissible documentary evidence, the Court finds that the State and Federal Handgun Restrictions do not violate Plaintiffs’ Second Amendment or Fourteenth Amendment rights, as they are consistent with this Nation’s history and tradition of firearms regulation,” Judge Nagala wrote in Succow v. Blanche.

Click here to continue reading.

Analysis: Fight Over Guns for Under-21s is Alive and Well as SCOTUS Ignores Circuit Split [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman

When the Supreme Court declined to hear several cases dealing with gun rights for adults under 21 last month, the justices opted to leave unmended one of the biggest splits in post-Bruen litigation. Now, new lower courts are joining the fray.

In a new 76-page merits opinion, a Connecticut judge last week issued one of the most comprehensive decisions concerning gun-control restrictions on 18-to-20-year-olds to date. In the case Succow v. Blanche, US District Judge Sarala Nagala addressed restrictions in both state and federal law and touched on virtually every facet of young adult Second Amendment jurisprudence that have split various federal appellate courts, including purchase, carry, and possession bans.

Notably, Nagala upheld them all.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access!

New Orders Keep Virginia AR-15 Sales Ban On Hold Until SCOTUS Ruling
By Stephen Gutowski

The Old Dominion’s ban on the sale of “assault firearms” will not be enforced until the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) decides an upcoming case on a similar ban.

On Wednesday, Jeffrey L. Campbell of Virginia’s 28th Judicial Circuit issued a new stay that bars enforcement of the law until after SCOTUS rules in Viramontes v. Cook County in the National Rifle Association’s challenge to the ban. On Friday, US District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema issued a similar stay in the Second Amendment Foundation’s federal challenge to the ban. The Supreme Court case is almost certain to come down by next June.

“It is further ordered that the preliminary injunction previously entered by this court by Order July 7 2026 shall remain in full effect,” Judge Campbell wrote in Santolla v. Katz, “and the Firearms Ban and Magazine Ban are not enforceable, until further Order of this Court or no later 60 days after the U.S. Supreme Court issues a decision in Viramontes and Grant, whichever occurs.”

“[I]t is ordered that all deadlines and proceedings in this matter and are stayed pending the United States Supreme Court’s issuance of the mandates in Viramontes and Grant, or until further order of this Court,” Judge Brinkema wrote in McDonald v. Katz.

Click here to read more.

Voters Pick Republicans Over Democrats on Guns, Put Issue Far Down Their Priority List
By Alejandra O’Connell-Domenech

New polling indicates Republicans hold an edge on gun policy headed into the midterms, but that might not help them much.

A Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Monday found 35 percent of Americans said the GOP has a better plan for handling “gun violence and gun control,” which is three points more than said the same for Democrats. Still, guns ranked near the bottom of a list of Americans’ biggest concerns in an Economist/YouGov poll released the same day. It found just 2 percent of American adults said guns were the most important issue to them.

Still, the Reuters/Ipsos poll indicates Republicans’ advantage on gun policy jumps by a point to 39/34 when considering just responses from registered voters. The advantage appears to stem primarily from 79 percent of Republicans backing their party’s approach to firearms regulation while only 74 percent of Democrats back their party. The poll found independents evenly split between the two parties on the issue, but that they were also most likely not to pick one or the other.

Click here to read the rest.

Podcast: AR-15s Return to Virginia Shelves (Ft. VCDL’s Phil Van Cleave)
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, AR-15s returned to the shelves of gun stores in the Old Dominion.

Despite being removed about three weeks ago amid a murky legal situation, the popular rifles are back on sale after gun-rights activists secured a statewide injunction against the state’s “assault firearms” ban. So, we have one of those activists on the show this week to update us on the legal situation. That is Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) president Philip Van Cleave.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing writer Jake Fogleman and I cover a new ruling out of the First Circuit Court of Appeals upholding Massachusetts’ ban on AR-15s and similar rifles. Meanwhile, we discuss the fact that the same weapons are now back on sale in Virginia after a state court injunction against the Commonwealth’s similar ban took effect.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: Appeals Court to Reconsider Foundation of Federal Gun Control [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman

With a recent vote, the country’s most conservative federal appeals court has agreed to consider a ruling that could upend America’s federal gun-control regime.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday voted to take the case US v. Squire en banc. The case concerns a challenge to § 922(g)(1), the federal lifetime gun ban for convicted felons, filed by Curtis Squires, a Louisiana man who was charged under the ban for possessing a handgun despite being previously convicted of dealing heroin and several other felonies. A three-judge Fifth Circuit panel rejected Squire’s challenge last month, giving occasion for the court to consider taking it up in full.

That history is fairly par for the course as far as court news goes these days. The federal felony gun ban is the most charged federal gun control law and, by extension, has become the most commonly challenged gun law in constitutional suits ever since the US Supreme Court decided New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen in 2022. Furthermore, at least one en banc appellate court has already struck the law down as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, at least as applied to a particular non-violent felon.

What makes the Fifth Circuit’s en banc grant in this case stand out then is not just that another court might again invalidate a felon-in-possession conviction. Instead, it is the fact that the court agreed to take up the case to expressly reconsider the underlying constitutional justification Congress used when it passed 922(g)(1), along with the rest of the Gun Control Act, in the first place.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

Ban AR-style rifles? Virginia is a warning. | Washington Post | By Stephen Gutowski

Father of Georgia school shooter sentenced to 15 years in prison in landmark murder case | CNN | By Eric Levenson, Isabel Rosales, and Devon M. Sayers

Colorado residents rush to buy guns ahead of new restrictions, breaking sales records for several stores | Denver Gazette | By Debbie Kelley and Matt Kyle

Sturm Ruger Swings to Profit as Firearms Demand Drives Revenue Growth | Wall Street Journal | By Anvee Bhutani

Civilian Marksmanship Program Announces Sale of M14s | Bearing Arms | By Cam Edwards

Virginia Court of Appeals Upholds Gun Ban for Forgery Conviction | Courthouse News Service

US Virgin Islands faces new lawsuit over nonresident carry rights | Associated Press | By Danica Coto

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

A state judge’s statewide injunction against enforcement of an “assault firearms” ban went into effect on Tuesday. I drove around to several gun stores and called many more to figure out what impact it was having. While not every store is back to selling the banned guns, the vast majority I spoke with were. But, as I explain for members, sales during the injunction are not without risk--at least, not completely.

Speaking of AR-15 bans, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman explains the reasoning the Third Circuit used to strike down New Jersey’s version. And the First Circuit decided to have its say this week by upholding Massachusetts’ ban. The policy came into play in Maine, too, as the Democratic candidate set to replace Graham Platner just moved the party to the left on the issue.

Plus, Tulane Professor Brian Frye unwinds the mystery at the center of the Supreme Court’s first big Second Amendment case on the podcast.

AR-15s Return to Virginia Shelves as Injunction Takes Effect
By Stephen Gutowski

Stores across the Old Dominion have begun selling guns and ammunition magazines targeted by the state’s “assault firearms” ban three weeks after they were forced to pull them from their shelves.

On Tuesday, The Reload visited or spoke with a dozen firearms dealers from Arlington to Charlottesville to Richmond to Roanoke to Virginia Beach to Woodbridge. All but one said they were once again selling AR-15s and magazines that hold more than 15 rounds of ammunition in the wake of a statewide injunction against enforcement of the law. National gunmakers also announced that they had begun shipping the previously-banned items to dealers in the state.

“Virginia is back open!” Daniel Defense, a prominent AR-15 manufacturer, wrote on Instagram.

“Virginia, we’re back!” Palmetto State Armory (PSA), a South Carolina-based gun maker, posted on its social media. “A temporary injunction is now in effect and PSA is resuming shipments!”

Click here to continue reading.

Analysis: The Lingering Legal Liability in Virginia’s Enjoined AR Ban [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

AR-15s and 30-round magazines are back on store shelves in the Old Dominion, but the state’s “assault firearms” ban may still present a risk to buyers and sellers.

On Tuesday, a statewide injunction led many stores to begin selling those guns and magazines after a three-week hiatus. Those stores’ decisions are backed by state and national gun-rights groups, the gun industry’s trade group, and major national gun brands. There’s a strong consensus in the gun world that AR and magazine sales are lawful, at least for now.

But that doesn’t mean the situation is stable, especially given the details of how we got to the current legal position.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

First Circuit Upholds Massachusetts ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban
By Jake Fogleman

The Bay State can continue to deny its citizens access to AR-15s and similar semi-automatic rifles, a federal appeals court has ruled.

A three-judge panel for the First Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday unanimously declined to revive a challenge to Massachusetts’ ban on the sale of “assault-style firearms.” The panel determined that a prior ruling upholding the state’s ban controlled the outcome of the case despite the plaintiff’s attempt to raise new Second Amendment arguments.

“In sum, Recchia has presented a narrow claim for declaring the Massachusetts law facially invalid that cannot succeed given Capen,” Judge Seth Aframe wrote in Recchia v. Campbell. “Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s rejection of Recchia’s facial challenge as a faithful application of circuit precedent.”

Click here to read more.

Maine Democrat Set to Replace Platner Moves Party Left on Guns in Key Senate Race
By Alejandra O’Connell-Domenech

The man who’s poised to capture Maine’s Democratic Senate nomination has backed new restrictions on AR-15s, waiting periods, and a myriad of other gun policies the disgraced candidate he’s replacing shied away from.

Former Maine Senate President Troy Jackson has already received backing from enough delegates to likely become the Pine Tree State’s new Democratic Senate nominee after Graham Platner withdrew from the race roughly two weeks ago over rape and other misconduct allegations from former girlfriends. The Maine Democratic Party has until July 27 to officially select a new nominee for the high-stakes race to unseat Republican Senator Susan Collins, but the shoo-in for the nomination is more committed to restricting firearms than the man he's replacing--or even he himself was a few years ago.

“I’ve evolved because Lewiston showed us the cost of doing nothing,” Jackson wrote in a 2025 op-ed backing the state’s “Red Flag” law ballot initiative. “And I refuse to accept that tragedy is inevitable when solutions are in front of us. Maine deserves leaders willing to evolve, to admit when laws fall short, and to act when lives are on the line.”

Click here to read the rest.

Podcast: Confronting the Flawed Story Behind the First SCOTUS Second Amendment Case (Ft. Brian Frye)
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, we’re looking back at the Supreme Court case that established the “common use” standard likely to play a major role in its new AR-15 case.

That case is 1939’s US v. Miller, and we have a guest with brand-new information that unsettles the official story of its namesake. Tulane law professor Brian Frye wrote the definitive account of Miller back in 2008, which ended up heavily influencing the Supreme Court’s opinion in 2009’s DC v. Heller. But, nearly 20 years later, he says the police and newspaper accounts about Jack Miller’s life are now in dispute.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss a federal judge’s recent rejection of the Justice Department’s request for a TRO against California’s ban on Glocks and other handguns deemed too easily convertible into illegal machineguns. We also cover a recent Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals ruling upholding a criminal conviction for violating the federal gun ban for marijuana users despite the Supreme Court’s recent ruling in Hemani.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: How the Third Circuit Bucked the AR-15 Ban Consensus [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman

In a bit of irony, the AR-15 ban circuit split that gun-rights advocates were hoping would entice the Supreme Court to take up an “assault weapon” ban case actually arrived just after it agreed to take one up.

The en banc Third Circuit Court of Appeals on Friday became the second appellate court to decide not to wait for the justices to have their say on the issue of semi-automatic rifle bans before entering the fray itself. Only this time, the court went the other way. In a 10-5 ruling, the panel held New Jersey’s ban on “assault firearms” and magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.

Thus, in one fell swoop, the Third Circuit shattered the current circuit court consensus on hardware bans en route to becoming the first federal appeals court to rule in favor of a gun-rights challenge to a state “assault weapon” and “large capacity” magazine ban. Here’s a look at how an en banc panel majority of judges appointed by presidents of both parties became the first in the country to strike down AR-15 and magazine bans a few weeks after the Supreme Court agreed to weigh in next term.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

After string of legal setbacks, New Jersey lawmakers weigh how to proceed on guns | Politico | By Joey Fox and Daniel Han

California’s push to ban technology used for ‘ghost guns’ finds unlikely foe in Hollywood | LA Times | By Gavin J. Quinton

Jewish gun group teaches members how to use arms amid rising antisemitism | ABC News | By Devin Dwyer

Shooting Ranges Go Quiet Luxury | New York Times | By Charles W. McFarlane

What to know before Colorado’s new law on semiautomatic firearms goes into effect | Denver Gazette | By Marissa Ventrelli

Fifth Circuit Upholds Felon-in-Possession Ban Against Defendant Who Smuggled Illegal Immigrants

DOJ Seeks to Block Virgin Islands’ ‘Assault Weapon’ and Magazine Ban | Bearing Arms | By Cam Edwards

Heller and Bruen are here to stay | SCOTUSblog | By Pete Patterson

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

A federal judge denied DOJ’s attempt to immediately block the California “Glock Ban.” And the reasoning she used to do it calls into question the DOJ’s broader Second Amendment project. I explain the problem the ruling highlights in a piece for Reload Members.

Congress took some action on guns this week, too. The House passed a bill that would ban credit card companies from using specialized tracking codes for gun retailers. It garnered bipartisan support, but can it do the same in the Senate?

We also got our first guns and weed ruling since the Supreme Court tossed charges against a marijuana-smoking gun owner on Second Amendment grounds last month. As Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman explains, the Eighth Circuit panel ruled the marijuana-smoking gun owner in its case could be disarmed despite the High Court’s ruling. Jake also lays out how a Seventh Circuit panel came down in favor of the Illinois AR-15 sales ban ahead of the Supreme Court taking up an identical challenge.

Plus, we have Georgia State University law professor Andrew Willinger on the podcast to discuss the lower court consensus on AR bans. And we have a bunch of stories down in the links, including the DOJ dropping an appeal of a recent court win by gun-rights activists.

Judge Denies DOJ Request to Immediately Block California’s ‘Glock Ban’
By Alejandra O’Connell-Domenech

A federal judge has denied the Trump Administration’s request to scrap The Golden State’s newest gun law.

Last Thursday, US District Judge Monica Ramirez Almadani rejected a Department of Justice (DOJ) request for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against California’s Assembly Bill 1127, which critics have dubbed a “Glock Ban” because it targets the firing mechanism used in the brand’s popular pistol line. She concluded that the challenge does not meet the criteria for emergency relief.

“While there may be merit to the United States ‘ claim that AB 1127 unlawfully restricts California constituents ‘ access to Glock and Glock-type pistols, the novel approach the United States employs to stake its claim is not obviously sound. To determine this novel issue, the Court will need to carefully interpret the statute and examine its plain language, legislative history, and historical usage, which it cannot achieve here due to the accelerated nature of a TRO,” Judge Ramirez Almadani wrote in US v. California. “Accordingly, the Court declines to grant the TRO given the uncertain viability of the United States ‘ claim pursuant to Section 12601.”

Click here to read the rest.

Analysis: Do the DOJ’s Second Amendment Lawsuits Have a Fatal Flaw? [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

The first ruling in one of the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) Second Amendment suits revealed a potential problem that could impact all of them.

Last Thursday, US District Judge Monica Ramirez Almadani denied DOJ’s request for a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) against California’s “Glock Ban.” While she left open the possibility that DOJ could still win on the merits after a lengthier process reviewing the evidence and arguments, she also took aim at a vulnerability in the case that might unravel the Department’s entire Second Amendment approach. That’s because the vulnerability is in the primary tactic the DOJ has used to go after state gun laws: the pattern-and-practice suit.

“The United States asserts a novel theory under Section 12601 that California is a governmental authority whose law enforcement officers are engaging in a pattern or practice of depriving individuals of their Second Amendment rights by enforcing AB 1127,” Judge Ramirez Almadani wrote in US v. California.

The ruling calls into question the tactic that has underlied the DOJ’s lawsuits against gun laws in Washington, DC, Colorado, Virginia, and California. Each one of those suits accuses state or local law enforcement of engaging in a pattern and practice of violating the Second Amendment of residents by generally enforcing gun laws the DOJ believes are unconstitutional. However, as Judge Ramirez Almadani emphasized, that’s not how DOJ has traditionally deployed pattern-and-practice suits.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access!

Appeals Court Upholds Weed and Guns Conviction Despite Recent Supreme Court Ruling
By Jake Fogleman

The government can continue to disarm some marijuana users, a federal appeals court has ruled just a few weeks after the Supreme Court first weighed in on the issue.

A unanimous three-judge panel for the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday upheld the indictment of Keshon Baxter, an Iowa man and alleged gang member convicted of being an unlawful marijuana user in possession of a firearm. It did so despite the Supreme Court’s ruling last month tossing similar charges against a Texas man in US v. Hemani. The panel determined the circumstances surrounding Baxter’s arrest were sufficiently similar to historical laws disarming dangerous people, unlike Hemani.

“[W]e conclude that the district court did not err in denying Baxter’s motion to dismiss as the Government met its burden in demonstrating that Baxter’s conduct was sufficiently analogous to the conduct prohibited by the Founding-era Terror of the People laws,” Judge Bobby Shepherd wrote in US v. Baxter. “The Supreme Court’s very recent unanimous decision in United States v. Hemani is not to the contrary.”

Click here to read more.

House Passes Bill Barring Gun Retail Tracking Codes
By Stephen Gutowski

Credit card companies may soon be forced to eliminate specialized merchant codes for gun dealers.

On Tuesday, the House of Representatives passed HR 1181, the Protecting Privacy in Purchases Act (PPPA). That bill would ban financial institutions from using Merchant Category Codes (MCC) unique to gun retailers. The bill, which passed on a vote of 221 to 201, was backed by five Democrats and all but one Republican.

“Law-abiding gun owners should not have their purchases tracked just because they are exercising their Second Amendment rights,” Rep. Richard Hudson (R-N.C. 9), who co-sponsored the bill, said in a statement.

Click here to continue reading.

Podcast: Why Lower Courts Agree on AR-15 Bans and Why it May Not Matter (Ft. Andrew Willinger)
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, we’re looking at how the lower courts have handled AR-15 ban challenges in light of the Supreme Court’s latest Second Amendment case.

To explain the consensus that’s developed across the appellate courts and provide a different perspective, we have Georgia State University Law Professor Andrew Willinger on the show. Willinger is the former executive director of the Duke University Firearms Law Center, and he teaches a class on the Second Amendment. He’s also been critical of the Court’s Second Amendment standard and its application at times.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss the latest injunction issued by a state court judge against Virginia’s “assault firearms” ban, which would block its enforcement across the entire commonwealth. We also cover resurfaced video of Texas Senate candidate James Talarico (D.) voicing support for an “assault weapon” and “high capacity” magazine ban.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: Seventh Circuit Jumps SCOTUS on ‘Assault Weapons’ [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman

The Supreme Court will soon decide whether AR-15 bans violate the Second Amendment, but one federal appeals court isn’t bothering to wait for the High Court’s say on the matter.

A divided three-judge panel for the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday upheld Illinois’ Protect Illinois Communities Act, which, among other restrictions, bans the sale of AR-15s as well as the magazines that often come with them. The 2-1 panel reversed a 2024 district court decision that struck the law down as unconstitutional. The majority said it was compelled to uphold the law because it fit within the country’s historical tradition of regulating “particularly dangerous weapons.”

“We hold that the Act is consistent with the principles that underpin our regulatory tradition,” Judge Amy St. Eve wrote for the majority in Barnett v. Raoul. “In short, legislatures have long imposed restrictions on particularly dangerous weapons, and the Act is but another chapter in that story.”

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

Feds Drop Fight To Keep Gun Ban At Post Offices | Tampa Free Press | By Brian Burns

Ghost gun company ordered to pay $100M in death of teen in historic verdict | The Associated Press | By Jake Offenhartz and Dylan Lovan

Fifth Circuit Upholds Gun Ban for Domestic Violence Misdemeanor | Bloomberg Law | By Megan Crepeau

Banning Parents from Possessing Guns Because Their Child Has Described Thoughts of “Harming Herself Using a Rope” Violated Second Amendment | Volokh Conspiracy | By Eugene Volokh

By the Numbers: Shootings Decrease, But Gun Sales Are Up | The Trace | By Aaron Mendelson

What Has Heller Wrought In 18 Years? | Volokh Conspiracy | By Josh Blackman

Congressional Researchers Lay Out Lawmakers’ Options To Address Gun Ban For Marijuana Users Following Supreme Court Ruling | Marijuana Moment | By Tom Angell

AR-15s and stun grenades: Inside the arsenals of California’s campus police forces | CalMatters | By Phoebe Huss

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

In Virginia, we saw a state judge expand his injunction against the state’s AR-15 sales ban to every law enforcement agent in the state. The Virginia Supreme Court will eventually have to sort out the numerous challenges, but it’ll do that in the shadow of the Supreme Court of the United States’s (SCOTUS) decision to take up its own AR-15 ban case. We have an exclusive on what experts will be listening for during oral arguments in that SCOTUS case. And, as I explain for Reload Members, the Virginia Supreme Court is probably going to be listening for the same things.

In Texas, newly-unearthed comments on AR-15 bans could shake up the close race for one of the state’s US Senate seats. In a 2020 video reviewed by The Reload, Democratic Candidate James Talarico backed an AR and ammo magazine ban. That’s something he hasn’t done in his latest race, where he’s focused more on age restrictions and painting himself as willing to buck the national party on guns.

The Seventh Circuit delivered the biggest non-AR news by questioning the scope of the mental health prohibitor for gun ownership. Although, as a story down in the links section shows, it also upheld Illinois’s AR-15 ban.

Plus, pioneering Second Amendment lawyer Stephen Halbrook joins the podcast to give his take on the High Court’s AR fight.

Virginia AR-15 Ban to be Blocked Statewide, Dealers Begin Preparing New Sales
By Stephen Gutowski

Soon, nobody in Virginia law enforcement can arrest or prosecute anyone for violating the state’s new “assault firearms” ban.

That’s the effect of a new order from Judge Jeffrey L. Campbell of Virginia’s 28th Judicial Circuit, which he released today and will become official on July 21st. Judge Campbell amended the injunction he initially issued last week to include not just the named plaintiffs in the case, but every police officer and prosecutor in the state. He concluded that allowing anyone in the state to enforce the sales ban, which he ruled likely violates the gun-rights provision of the Virginia Constitution, would create a “treacherous patchwork of enforcement” that threatens the rights of the plaintiffs.

“[T]he Court now finds that to afford complete relief to the Plaintiffs herein, the injunction imposed by the Court’s prior ruling shall be extended to statewide application and enjoin all law enforcement agencies of the Commonwealth and its localities, to include law enforcement officers as defined in §9.1-101 of the Code of Virginia and Commonwealth Attorneys from enforcement of the provisions of the Bans within all localities and jurisdictions of the Commonwealth on the same terms and conditions as otherwise set forth in the Court’s prior letter opinion,” Judge Campbell wrote in Santolla v. Katz.

Click here to continue reading.

Analysis: Why the Virginia Supreme Court Might Punt on AR-15s [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

The legal fight of Virginia’s “assault firearms” ban is heating up and heading to the highest court in the state. But what will the Virginia Supreme Court (VSC) do with the case?

On Wednesday, Judge Jeffrey L. Campbell of Virginia’s 28th Judicial Circuit escalated the legal situation by expanding his preliminary injunction against enforcement of the ban to include every law enforcement official in the state. Just a few days earlier, a three-judge panel commissioned by the Virginia Supreme Court rejected Attorney General Jay Jones’s (D.) attempt to have all the state-level challenges combined into one and moved to Richmond. Before Judge Campbell’s order goes into effect on July 21st, though, the Virginia Supreme Court may have a direct say in the law, since Jones has already filed an emergency appeal of an injunction issued by another Virginia judge.

However, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) recently made a move that is likely to impact what the VSC does.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access!

Texas’s Talarico Backed AR-15, Ammo Mag Ban in 2020 Video
By Stephen Gutowski

The Texas Democrat hoping to flip one of the state’s US Senate seats said he wants to ban sales of the nation’s most popular rifles and the magazines they often come with.

James Talarico told a group of voters that banning the sale of “assault weapons” and “high-capacity” ammunition magazines was one of his top priorities during a video meet-and-greet The Reload reviewed. When asked what specific gun policies he supports, Talarico responded with a slew of new restrictions that included a ban targeting AR-15s and similar firearms.

“I think universal background checks, I think closing the gun show loophole, an assault weapon ban, a large capacity magazine ban, I think restricting large firearm purchases, I think even we should start to think about handgun design safety standards as well,” Talarico said in the 2020 video. “So probably in that order are the things I’m most interested in championing and working on.”

Talarico’s campaign did not respond to a request for comment on whether the candidate still supports an assault weapon ban.

Click here to read more.

Seventh Circuit Questions Mental Health Gun Ban
By Jake Fogleman

It’s not always constitutional for the federal government to charge someone for possessing guns after a mental health commitment, a federal appeals court has ruled.

A unanimous three-judge panel for the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday revived a federal prosecution against an Indiana man accused of illegally possessing firearms after a prior involuntary mental health commitment. The panel determined that the federal ban in question is facially constitutional. However, it also held the law is potentially susceptible to as-applied challenges and said the lower court needed to conduct further fact-finding to determine the defendant’s dangerousness before dismissing the charges.

“The district court’s order dismissing the §922(g)(4) charges is vacated,” Judge Frank Easterbrook wrote in US v. Rose. “The judge has discretion on remand to give Rose and the prosecutor a chance to present evidence addressing our seven questions, now that Rahimi and Hemani have clarified the appropriate analysis.”

Click here to read more.

Podcast: Where SCOTUS Has Come on Guns and Where It’s Going in the AR Ban Case (ft. Stephen Halbrook)
By Stephen Gutowski

The Supreme Court has taken up a Second Amendment challenge to a pair of AR-15 sales bans. It’s one of the most consequential in the Court’s history of gun cases.

To discuss it, we have someone who has been around for that entire history and played a major role in shaping the Court’s Second Amendment jurisprudence. Lawyer Stephen Halbrook joins the show to explain that history and provide insight into how it will likely rule in the AR case.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss the Court’s AR case. We also provide a status update on Virginia’s new ban on those same weapons, which officially went into effect despite multiple court injunctions.

Audio here. Video here.

What Scholars Will Listen for in SCOTUS AR-15 Ban Oral Arguments [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has taken up a Second Amendment challenge to a pair of “assault weapons” bans, and everyone wants to know where it will come down.

A collection of Second Amendment scholars from across the ideological spectrum told The Reload they expect the Court to strike down the laws. Experts have often been able to predict the outcomes of SCOTUS gun cases on first impression. But that hasn’t always been the case, as we saw in US v. Hemani.

Given that, what are these experts listening for to confirm their theory of the case once the Supreme Court hears oral arguments in Viramontes v. Cook County?

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

Under-21 gun possession ban upheld by MD appellate court | Maryland Daily Record | By Ian Round

Illinois’ assault weapons ban upheld by appeals court as U.S. Supreme Court mulls Cook County’s prohibition | Chicago Sun Times | By Jon Seidel

Harmeet Dhillon Lays Out DOJ Second Amendment Strategy | Fox News | By Elaine Mallon

Litigation as a Weapon: The Philadelphia Gun Store Case | Wyoming Firearms Research Center | By Jonathan Goldstein

Murder in the US Fell Dramatically in the First Half of 2026 | Jeff-alytics | By Jeff Asher

Colorado prepares overhaul of semiautomatic gun sales | Colorado Newsline | By Sara Wilson

ATF Director Pushes Back on Maddow’s Attack on Agency | Bearing Arms | By Cam Edwards

July 4th Shootings This Year Went Down — Again | The Trace | By Jennifer Mascia

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

This week, the Court agreed to hear a pair of cases against recently passed “assault weapons” bans. After handing down two Second Amendment decisions this term, which Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman explains did relatively little to change the playing field, the Court is poised to decide what’s likely to be its most consequential gun case in a half-decade. Jake details the state of play at the lower courts that has led to this moment.

Meanwhile, I speak to half a dozen Second Amendment scholars from across the ideological spectrum to get an idea of where the Court is likely to come down, what issues will be the key deciding factors, and which justices are the ones to watch. There was a surprising level of consensus!

To drive home the stakes of the case, we also have an update on what’s going on in Virginia. Despite some last-minute court orders, it appears AR-15s and other guns targeted by the state’s new sales ban have been pulled from shelves. But not before demand for them went truly parabolic.

Plus, the lawyer who beat Hawaii’s gun carry restrictions at the Supreme Court joins the podcast to explain what the ruling really means. And we have a bunch more stories in the links, including one about a California locality that’s charging $1,500 for carry permits.

Supreme Court to Decide Constitutionality of AR-15 Bans
By Jake Fogleman

The nation’s highest court will decide if governments may ban the most popular rifle in America.

On Tuesday, the Supreme Court announced that it granted cert in Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins. The cases, which the Court opted to consolidate into one, concern Second Amendment challenges to Cook County, Illinois’ local “assault weapon” ban ordinance and Connecticut’s similar statewide ban, respectively. The cases came to the Court on appeal by gun-rights groups after both the Seventh Circuit and Second Circuit upheld each ban last summer, decisions the Court will now review.

In doing so, the justices will decide “Whether the Second and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to possess AR-15 platform and similar semi-automatic rifles,” according to the question presented.

Click here to continue reading.

Experts Expect Supreme Court to Strike Down AR-15 Bans
By Stephen Gutowski

The nation’s highest court will decide whether the Second Amendment protects so-called assault weapons, and there is widespread agreement about what direction it’s likely to go.

A collection of scholars from across the ideological spectrum with decades of experience studying the Second Amendment and American gun laws told The Reload that Viramontes v. Cook County is one of the most important cases the High Court has taken to date. They also held a consensus view that the Court is likely to tip in favor of the plaintiffs. Though, some were significantly more confident than others.

“The Court will affirm its longstanding rule that governments cannot ban common arms widely used for lawful purposes,” David Kopel, Research Director of the Independence Institute, whose legal briefs have been cited by numerous federal courts in Second Amendment decisions–including the Supreme Court–told The Reload.

“I expect the Court to strike down these laws,” Georgia State University Constitutional Law Professor Adam Willinger, who teaches about the Second Amendment and has published numerous law review articles on it, told The Reload.

Click here to read the rest.

Analysis: SCOTUS Confronts Circuit Consensus on AR-15 Bans [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman

After years of suspense, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) will decide whether the Second Amendment protects AR-15s. When it does, the Court will not be mending an open circuit split, but instead confronting a landscape of unanimous outcomes among the federal courts of appeals.

The Court on Tuesday granted cert in Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins, two separate cases that will ultimately be consolidated into one by the time the justices consider them next term. Each came to the Court on appeal by gun-rights groups after both the Seventh Circuit and Second Circuit upheld the respective “assault weapon” ban statutes being challenged.

That procedural history is indicative of the state of play in recent years.

Since the Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, every federal appeals court to issue a precedential decision on “assault weapon” bans has left the challenged law in place. More specifically, the First, Second, Fourth, and Seventh Circuits have all held, in different procedural postures and with varying rationales, that bans on AR-15-style rifles and similar firearms survive Second Amendment scrutiny.

Given that lopsided track record, it’s worth revisiting the apparent lower court consensus before SCOTUS weighs in and decides the issue once and for all.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Virginia ‘Assault Firearms’ Ban Takes Effect Amid Murky Legal Situation, Record Rifle Sales
By Stephen Gutowski

AR-15s and other popular rifles have been taken off store shelves in Virginia, even as two judges stopped at least some officials from enforcing the law, and sales hit new peaks.

While FBI data released on Wednesday shows demand for the banned guns more than tripled to an all-time high in June, retailers are unwilling to risk stocking them due to concerns over legal liability. Legal challenges from several groups, including the National Rifle Association (NRA) and even the Department of Justice (DOJ), have garnered two preliminary injunctions against the Virginia State Police and several local prosecutors, but not all state or local officials. The half-dozen Virginia gun stores The Reload visited or called throughout the state all said they aren’t selling the affected guns unless and until they get further legal clarity–a position the gun industry’s trade group, which has its own lawsuit going against the law, reiterated.

“It’s a bit of a muddled mess,” Larry Keane, General Counsel of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, told The Reload. “We’re not going to tell people statewide to sell until this law is enjoined. It really would be imprudent to say that.”

Click here to read more.

Podcast: The Lawyer Who Slayed the ‘Vampire Rule’ Explains SCOTUS Gun Ruling (Ft. Alan Beck)
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) struck down Hawaii’s broadest gun-carry restriction.

To discuss the outcome of the case, we have the lawyer who won it on the show. Wolford v. Lopez was Alan Beck’s first case at SCOTUS, and it turned into his first win. He said he was very happy with where the Court came down and sees it opening several new avenues for Second Amendment challenges.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I give our takes on Wolford v. Lopez. We also discuss the new injunction issued by a Virginia judge against the state’s AR-15 ban just days before it was set to take effect.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: SCOTUS Delivers Little in the Way of New Second Amendment Guidance [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) just handed down the most Second Amendment opinions in a single term. Yet, the decisions didn’t move the needle much on how lower courts should treat outstanding gun law questions.

In the final month before taking their summer hiatus, the justices unanimously struck down a nearly 60-year-old statute that prohibits addicts or unlawful users of controlled substances from owning firearms, at least as applied to one particular non-violent marijuana user. Just seven days later, the justices struck down Hawaii’s “Vampire Rule,” which banned carrying a gun onto publicly accessible private property without express permission.

Together, those decisions marked the first time that SCOTUS had ever decided more than one Second Amendment case in a single sitting. That it did so, each time siding with a plaintiff challenging an existing gun-control law no less, is a significant win for gun-rights advocates.

However, whether that significance will extend beyond the specific issues in each case seems less promising.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

California County Jacks Up Carry Permit Application Fee to More Than $1,500 | Bearing Arms | By Cam Edwards

Plan to ease rules on mailing guns could help company Trump Jr. has stake in | The Washington Post | By Perry Stein

Local Officials Vow To Shield the Public from Virginia’s New Gun Laws | Reason | By JD Tuccille

Justice Department sues Virginia, California over gun laws | CBS News | By Sarah Lynch Baldwin

Philadelphia’s Gun Carry License Revocations More Than Doubled Over the Past Five Years | The Trace | By Mensah M. Dean

Iowa Supreme Court limits use of domestic abuser gun ban | The Gazette | By Tom Barton

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

First up, the Supreme Court handed down the final Second Amendment decision of its term. It struck down Hawaii’s ban on gun carriers entering publicly accessible private property, such as businesses, without the owner’s express permission. The ruling ends the Bruen-response law with the broadest potential impact, but one dissent argues it also radically reshapes the Bruen test. That’s a claim I examine in an analysis for Reload Members.

Shortly after the Supreme Court struck down Hawaii’s law, a state judge blocked enforcement of Virginia’s “assault firearms” sales ban. A federal judge also allowed the NRA’s trademark claims against its own foundation to move forward--the financial fallout of that fight is the center of our podcast with OSU accounting professor Brian Mittendorf this week, by the way. And gun-rights lawyer Kostas Moros explains why a Fifth Circuit silencer ruling may have just created a circuit split impacting all sorts of hardware bans, which could entice the Supreme Court to take up a case sooner than later.

Plus, the Department of Justice threatened to sue California over its “Glock Ban.” And Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman looks at one of the most interesting challenges to Virginia’s AR ban (though, it isn’t the one that actually got the injunction.) Down in the links, we have several significant stories--including the NRA CEO’s response to my recent Washington Post piece on the group’s precarious position.

Supreme Court Strikes Down Hawaii ‘Vampire Rule’
By Stephen Gutowski

The nation’s highest court has tossed the nation’s most expansive gun-carry restriction.

On Thursday, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) ruled 6-3 that Hawaii’s ban on carrying a gun onto publicly accessible private property violates the Second Amendment. The Court found the law, dubbed the “Vampire Rule” by critics, was an unconstitutionally broad restriction on the right to bear arms.

“This regime hobbles what the Second Amendment protects: the right of Americans to carry arms for self-defense as they go about their daily lives,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in Wolford v. Lopez. “We hold that the law is unconstitutional.”

Click here to read more.

Analysis: Did SCOTUS Alter Its Second Amendment Test in Wolford? [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

“Judges are now free to insert any meaning they desire into the text of the Second Amendment and then demand the government provide analogues to fit that interpretation.”

That’s what Justice Kentaji Brown Jackson wrote of the effect of the majority opinion in Wolford v. Lopez. She argued the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) upended its Second Amendment test when it struck down Hawaii’s “Vampire Rule” on Thursday. She slammed the court for abandoning the test it laid out in 2022’s New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen and creating a “one-way ratchet” that “works only to the benefit of armed carry.”

But how do Justice Jackson’s claims stack up against the majority opinion and how the Supreme Court applied its test in previous Second Amendment cases?

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access!

State Judge Blocks Virginia ‘Assault Firearm’ Sales Ban
By Jake Fogleman

Virginia’s attempt to ban the sale of AR-15s and similar firearms will not be allowed to take effect.

In a ruling from the bench on Thursday, Lancaster County Circuit Judge John Martin issued a preliminary injunction against Virginia’s “assault firearm” sales and related carry ban. The decision came after an initial hearing in the lawsuit Crump v. Katz brought by the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) and Gun Owners of America (GOA).

“VCDL/GOA lawsuit victory! The judge in Lancaster County has issued a temporary injunction against enforcement of both the ‘assault firearm’ ban and carry prohibition,” VCDL President Philip Van Cleave said. “I’m not sure about the magazine ban yet, but I should know soon and will advise. For now, the enjoinment applies to the Virginia State Police statewide.”

Click here to read the rest.

Analysis: How a Silencer Ruling Could Entice SCOTUS to Take Up an ‘Assault Weapons’ Ban Case
By Kostas Moros

Gun-rights organizations have long been trying to achieve a circuit split in an “assault weapon” or magazine ban case as a means to get the issue to the Supreme Court. A Fifth Circuit panel may have just created one, but not in the way you might think.

So far, all the courts that have heard Second Amendment challenges to hardware bans have upheld them. We’re awaiting pending rulings from the Third and Seventh Circuits that could create a direct split with circuits like the First, Second, Fourth, and Ninth, which have already upheld “assault weapon” bans, magazine capacity limits, or both. The DC Court of Appeals briefly created such a split, but that ruling was vacated and will be reheard en banc in part thanks to US Attorney Jeanine Pirro.

Our wait for a circuit split in a hardware case may now be over, though.

Click here to read the full piece.

DOJ Sets Sights on California ‘Glock Ban,’ Handgun Roster
By Jake Fogleman

The Golden State’s latest gun regulations could soon be on the receiving end of a Department of Justice (DOJ) lawsuit.

Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon sent a letter to California Governor Gavin Newsom (D.) and Attorney General Rob Bonta (D.) on Wednesday, asking them to enter pre-suit settlement negotiations over the state’s forthcoming ban on pistols that feature firing mechanisms common to Glocks, as well as its so-called roster of approved handguns. The letter also said that if Dhillon’s negotiation offer is rejected or ignored over the next week, California should expect to see the Justice Department in court.

“Because handguns are the most popular weapon chosen by Americans for self-defense, a prohibition of their use is invalid,” Dhillon wrote. “This letter is to inform you that as the Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, I have authorized the filing of a complaint in Federal district court against the state.”

Click here to continue reading.

Federal Judge Allows NRA to Continue Trademark Suit Against its Foundation
By Stephen Gutowski

The National Rifle Association (NRA) can pursue its trademark claims against the NRA Foundation in federal court, but not its other claims.

That’s the ruling US District Judge Sparkle L. Sooknanan delivered on Wednesday. The judge decided the NRA had shown enough to continue its trademark infringement claims against the Foundation.

“[A]t this stage, the dispute is quite simple: the Foundation previously had permission to use the NRA’s marks, and now it allegedly does not,” Judge Sooknanan wrote in NRA v. NRA Foundation. “That is enough to reject the Foundation’s arguments for dismissal.”

Click here to read more.

Podcast: NRA Faces New Financial Peril (Ft. OSU’s Brian Mittendorf)
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, we’re taking a look at the state of the National Rifle Association (NRA) as it faces what may be its biggest challenge yet.

The NRA has survived 150 years, a corruption lawsuit, and a bankruptcy filing. But it is now staring down a potential crackup with the group’s foundation attempting to split off. Ohio State University accounting professor Brian Mittendorf joins the show to explain just how much of a threat to the group’s financial stability.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing writer Jake Fogleman and I break down the Supreme Court’s first major Second Amendment decision of the year in US v. Hemani, where the justices unanimously upheld the gun rights of a regular marijuana user. We also discuss the Court’s rejection of several additional gun cases and cover the latest litigation against Virginia’s “assault firearm” ban.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: Gun-Rights Advocates Turn Militia Argument Against Virginia [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman

For decades, the most common argument advanced by gun-control advocates has been that constitutional protections for keeping and bearing arms secure a collective, rather than individual, right tied directly to militia service. Now, gun-rights advocates are deploying a version of that argument against Virginia’s AR-15 sales ban.

Among the plethora of legal challenges filed against Virginia’s forthcoming “assault firearm” and magazine bans, the angle taken in the state-court challenge Curtis v. Katz stands out. Filed by former Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli (R.) on behalf of several Virginia gun owners and a licensed dealer, the suit argues the state’s bans violate the “Militia Clause” in Article I, Section 13 of the Virginia Constitution because they ban the weapons needed for collective defense.

“The arms that the body of the people must possess are those suitable for militia service—arms whose nature and purpose make them capable of contributing to the common defense,” the complaint reads. “The semi-automatic centerfire rifles and pistols, and the standard-capacity magazines banned by the Act are precisely such weapons: they are the civilian analogs of the standard service rifles issued to the Virginia National Guard and the active-duty armed forces of the United States.”

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

Virginia judges ends injunction against background checks for private firearm sales | Cardinal News | By Elizabeth Beyer

After 150 years, the NRA is here to stay | Washington Post Opinion | By Doug Hamlin

Colorado Gun Owners Sue Over New Law Allowing Warrantless Access to Dealer Records | Reason | By Tosin Akintola

President Trump Says Administration Is ‘Working’ on National Right to Carry Reciprocity | Bearing Arms | By Cam Edwards

Ninth Circuit once again considers California ban on rifle sales to young adults | Courthouse News Service | By Quinn Welsch

Florida’s gun waiting period could end as state AG sides with challengers | WUSF | By Douglas Soule

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

In the first of its two gun-rights cases for the term, the High Court backed a pot smoker’s challenge to his gun arrest. It unanimously tossed the charges against him as unconstitutional. But it also declined to strike down the underlying law and laid out a bevy of caveats. So, I try to suss out what the ruling means for the millions of Americans who also smoke weed and either own guns or want to.

That’s not all the Supreme Court news for the week. The Court also made some news with what cases it decided not to hear.

The lower courts were busy this week, too. A Fifth Circuit panel declared silencers protected arms, but upheld regulations on them anyway. The Washington Supreme Court also upheld the state’s gun ban for those with multiple DUI convictions.

Meanwhile, as they cheered the Supreme Court’s decision, gun-rights activists also came to the defense of an NBA All-Star who was arrested for unlawful carry in Texas, of all places. The incident reveals some underlying complaints with the Lone Star State’s permitless carry law and a specific exception to it.

Plus, Florida gun-rights lawyer Matt Larosiere joins the podcast to discuss his new settlement ending the state’s gun waiting periods. And we have a bunch of stories down in the links, including a new piece from me over at The Washington Post about the NRA’s precarious position.

Supreme Court Unanimously Rules in Favor of Pot-Smoking Gun Owner
By Jake Fogleman

Being a regular user of marijuana is not enough to cost someone their gun rights.

That is the holding the nation’s highest court delivered Thursday morning. In a unanimous ruling, the Supreme Court upheld the Second Amendment rights of a Texas man and admitted regular marijuana user who was found with drugs and a handgun in his home by the FBI. In doing so, the Court at least partially struck down a nearly 60-year-old statute that prohibits addicts or unlawful users of controlled substances from owning firearms.

“But the government’s analogy fails under every measure it asks us to consider: The historical laws on which it relies targeted different kinds of people, did so for different reasons, and operated in different ways,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote for the majority in US v. Hemani. “And faced with all these shortcomings in the government’s submission, we cannot say it has carried its conceded burden of showing its prosecution of Mr. Hemani complies with the Second Amendment.”

Click here to read more.

Analysis: A Narrow SCOTUS Gun Holding With Significant Real-World Implications [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) sided with a man prosecuted for owning guns while using one of the most popular recreational drugs in the country, but what impact will that have for everyone else?

On Thursday, SCOTUS handed down a unanimous decision that the federal charges against Ali Hemani couldn’t be justified under the Second Amendment. It didn’t strike down the federal law underpinning those charges, though. And it went out of its way to describe a half dozen different ways its opinion in the case was limited.

“In many respects, this case is a narrow one,” Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote in US v. Hemani. “We do not address efforts to ban addicts, or those presently intoxicated, from possessing a firearm. We do not address other prophylactic laws Congress might adopt after determining that users of a particular drug pose a special risk of misusing firearms. We do not address 18 U.S.C. §922(g)(1)’s provision disarming individuals convicted of felonies (often including drug-related ones). We do not even address whether the government could bring a prosecution under §922(g)(3) accompanied by individualized proof that the defendant’s use of marijuana (or any other drug) renders him a danger to himself or others. Or proof that a certain drug always renders its users dangerous because of its potency or for some other reason. None of those issues is before us and we do not pass on them either way.”

Beyond all of that, the High Court noted that the drug user prohibition accounts for just five percent of all convictions under the federal prohibited persons categories. But there’s still good reason to believe Hemani will have a substantial impact on a wide swath of American gun owners.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access!

Fifth Circuit Panel Rules Silencers are Protected Arms, Can Still be Regulated
By Stephen Gutowski

A federal appeals court has ruled the Second Amendment covers silencers, but that doesn’t mean the government can’t restrict them.

On Thursday, a three-judge panel on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously upheld Brennan Comeaux’s conviction for possessing unregistered silencers. Comeaux argued silencers are protected by the Second Amendment, and the National Firearms Act’s (NFA) registration requirement is therefore unconstitutional. The panel agreed on the first point, but not the second.

“Though silencers are Second Amendment ‘Arms,’ because Comeaux has not alleged that the NFA’s shall-issue regime has been put toward abusive ends, he has not shown that § 5861(d) burdens his Second Amendment rights,” Judge Jerry E. Smith wrote for the majority in US v. Comeaux. “The judgment of conviction is AFFIRMED.”

Click here to read more.

SCOTUS Declines Two Second Amendment Challenges Against New York, Relists 25 Other Gun Cases
By Stephen Gutowski

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) won’t hear multiple challenges to New York’s gun laws, and it’s still thinking about dozens of Second Amendment cases.

On Monday, SCOTUS declined to take up a case against the Empire State’s gun industry liability law and another against its gun-carry training requirements. That sends Corbett v. Hochul and National Shooting Sports Foundation, Inc. (NSSF) v. James back down to the lower courts for a fight on the merits while the challenged laws remain in force. At the same time, it accepted four new Second Amendment challenges for consideration and relisted another 25.

The High Court didn’t explain its actions in the gun cases, including the two denials.

Click here to read more.

Gun-Rights Groups Slam James Harden’s Arrest
By Stephen Gutowski

An NBA All-Star’s arrest in Texas has triggered backlash against the state’s carry laws from some of the nation’s leading gun groups.

On Saturday, Houston police arrested Cleveland Cavaliers guard James Harden on a misdemeanor count of unlawfully carrying a weapon. By Wednesday, the National Rifle Association (NRA), the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms (CCRKBA), Gun Owners of America (GOA), the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), and others put out statements condemning the arrest. The gun groups decried Harden being arrested for having a gun in his car merely because it wasn’t holstered, especially given Texas’s reputation as a pro-gun state.

“SMH, Texas not being as Texas as Texas thinks it is,” FPC posted on Wednesday. “Being barred for mere possession of a gun without it being “properly holstered” is fucking nonsense.”

Click here to read more.

Podcast: Florida Waves White Flag on Gun Waiting Periods (Ft. Matt Larosiere)
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, we’re talking about a new legal agreement that would end Florida’s waiting periods on gun purchases.

To discuss the ins and outs of the agreement, we have the gun-rights lawyer who negotiated it on the show. That’s Matt Larosiere. He filed a Second Amendment suit against the law alongside Mountain States Legal Foundation and the National Rifle Association.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones’ defense of the state’s new “assault firearm” ban, where he claimed the Virginia state constitution does not protect an individual right to bear arms. We also cover the DOJ’s latest Second Amendment investigation into the city of Philadelphia’s pattern of subjective gun-permit revocations. And we have a members’ segment to boot!

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: Where DUIs and the Second Amendment Stand [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman

Can somebody’s history of drunk driving overcome their right to keep and bear arms? At least one state’s high court seems to think so.

In a closely divided 5-4 opinion, the Washington Supreme Court on Thursday reversed a lower court ruling on the question. It held that the state does not violate the Second Amendment by disarming people with multiple impaired driving offenses.

“Under the Second Amendment, Geoffrey McLellan and Jackson Holloway argue a Washington law that temporarily prohibits them from possessing firearms as a consequence of their multiple driving under the influence (DUI) convictions within seven years is unconstitutional as applied to them,” Justice Steven Gonzalez wrote for the majority in McLellan and Holloway v. Brown. “We granted direct interlocutory review to determine whether that temporary prohibition violates the Second Amendment. We conclude it does not.”

That outcome, all things considered, is relatively narrow. It hinges on a unique Washington prohibited persons statute and merely leaves the status quo unchanged for two would-be gun carriers. But the analysis the court conducted to reach that conclusion is one that, if adopted by other courts, carries potentially enormous implications.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

The NRA is almost out of bullets | Washington Post | By Stephen Gutowski

Judge Denies Injunction in Virginia Gun and Magazine Ban Lawsuit | Bearing Arms | By Cam Edwards

Florida appeals court shoots down concealed carry age restrictions | Courthouse News Service | By Alex Pickett

Maryland Court Rules Against Unconstitutional Stop-and-Frisk in Victory for Gun Owners | Reason | By Tosin Akintola

Michigan’s ‘permission slip’ to buy pistols violates 2nd Amendment, new lawsuit says | M Live | By John Agar

‘It’s not going to work’: New York’s 3D printer gun-blocking law isn’t even supported by its own supporters | Fortune | By David A. Lieb and Associated Press

More states restrict 3D-printed firearms | Stateline | By Amanda Watford

This Man Wants to Help You Print Your Own Gun | Rolling Stone | By Jack Crosbie

Colorado State Shooting Association files constitutional challenge to firearms dealer law | Colorado Politics | By Marissa Ventrelli

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

This time, it’s Philadelphia that’s under DOJ investigation over claims it is unconstitutionally revoking gun-carry permits. That adds the City of Brotherly Love to the same target pool as the City of Angels and the Mile High City. But, as I explain, DOJ’s letter indicated Philly might avoid the same lawsuit the other two are facing.

Speaking of potential DOJ targets, Virginia’s government revealed how it’s going to defend the new AR-15 sales ban it passed earlier this year. Attorney General Jay Jones (D.) rolled out a series of well-worn arguments and one major throwback to the pre-Heller days against a state court challenge this week. I break down his key claims in a piece for Reload Members.

In Texas, we got some new insight into the gun politics of the Senate race that could constitute the tipping point for control of the chamber. Democratic candidate Jame Talarico said he supports the Second Amendment, but not absolutely. He said he would buck his party on the issue, but didn’t provide specifics on how.

Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman also explains the details of a DOJ appeal of a non-violent felon’s Second Amendment case that the Supreme Court denied, and what it could say about one of the Second Amendment cases still pending before the Court. Then I look at how the latest development in the NRA’s internal drama could spell the return of disgraced former CEO Wayne LaPierre.

Plus, Pew Research Center’s John Gramlich joins the podcast to discuss America’s falling gun murder rate and rising gun suicide rate. And we have a slew of stories in the links, including another gun case the Supreme Court turned away that also implicates the First Amendment.

DOJ Opens Second Amendment Investigation into Philadelphia Police
By Stephen Gutowski

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has accused the Philadelphia Police Department (PPD) of violating the gun rights of some residents with gun-carry permits.

On Tuesday, the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division sent a letter to Philadelphia Mayor Cherelle Parker (D.) announcing a new investigation into the city’s police. The DOJ said it is looking into reports that the PPD is revoking gun-carry permits for subjective reasons that don’t match up with state law or the Supreme Court’s recent Second Amendment precedents. It said it plans to investigate the claims and file suit if it determines the allegations are true.

“The investigation will evaluate the PPD ‘ s policies and practices regarding issuance and revocation of licenses to carry firearms and the PPD’s enforcement of the Pennsylvania Uniform Firearms Act of 1995,” Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon wrote to Mayor Parker. “The Department will be assessing law enforcement practices under the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.”

Click here to continue reading.

Analysis: How Virginia is Defending its New AR-15 Ban in Court [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

Virginia’s “assault firearms” ban hasn’t yet gone into effect, but the state just laid out a novel legal defense for it.

On Monday, Virginia Attorney General Jay Jones (D.) filed his opposition to a preliminary injunction request in Crump v. Katz. He employed a mix of throwback arguments over the nature of gun-rights protections, modern claims about the AR-15’s popularity and dangerousness, as well as numerous procedural assertions to try and convince the Virginia state court hearing the case.

The most notable aspect of Virginia’s defense is its attempt to circumvent the state’s Second Amendment analog.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Texas Senate Candidate Talarico Says He’d Break with Democrats on Guns, Offers No Specifics
By Stephen Gutowski

The candidate Democrats are counting on to help flip the United States Senate explained some of his views on gun policy this week.

On Monday, James Talarico joined the Cogdell Law Uncensored podcast and described where he stands on firearms. He outlined his beliefs in broad strokes but didn’t provide many specifics. He implied he would go against party leadership on the issue, but didn’t give a specific example of how--though, he did decry “people on the left who are trying to take away people’s guns.”

“We have a right to bear arms, to protect ourselves, our families. We have a right to own weapons for sport or for hunting,” Talarico said. “But like any freedom in the Bill of Rights, it’s not absolute.”

Click here to read the rest.

Supreme Court Turns Down DOJ Appeal in Non-Violent Felon Gun Case
By Jake Fogleman

The Supreme Court isn’t ready to address the issue of gun rights for non-violent felons—even after a lower court partially struck down the federal law banning them from owning guns.

In its Monday orders list, the Court declined to take up the case US v. Cockerham. That case is a Department of Justice (DOJ) appeal of a Fifth Circuit ruling tossing a Mississippi man’s indictment for possessing a firearm after being convicted of failing to pay child support. The DOJ asked the Court to address its appeal after the justices issued a decision in US v. Hemani, a pending challenge to the federal gun ban for marijuana users, but the Court declined.

None of the justices wrote separately to comment on the denial.

Click here to read more.

Podcast: Gun Murder Slides as Gun Suicides Surge (Ft. Pew’s John Gramlich)
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, we’re looking at a sorely undercovered national story: the murder rate is declining at an incredible rate. At the same time, the suicide rate is headed the other way.

To explore why that divergence has happened, we’ve got Pew Research Center’s John Gramlich on the show to discuss the details. He wrote a piece looking at the most recent FBI and CDC data on gun murder and suicide. He said the results are remarkable.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I cover new data showing Virginia’s gun sales doubling year-over-year, landing it in the number 2 spot in the nation for long gun sales, as the state’s new “assault firearm” ban is set to take effect. We also cover the legal fight over the state’s universal background check law, where gun-rights groups successfully convinced a judge to continue preventing its enforcement for now.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: The NRA Foundation’s Split Raises Specter of Wayne LaPierre’s Return [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

Internal tensions at the National Rifle Association (NRA) flared up again this week over a pair of stories that set the stage for the potential comeback of disgraced former Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre.

On Tuesday, a New York appeals court panel dealt LaPierre another loss. It ruled he still has to pay the NRA $4.3 million in restitution and can’t serve in its leadership for the next decade. LaPierre vowed to pursue more appeals, but the holding seems like a major blow to any hopes he might have of rebuilding his career in gun advocacy.

That is, until you consider what else happened on Tuesday.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

Supreme Court turns down appeal by elementary school student on AR-15 hat | SCOTUSBlog | By Amy Howe

Most traced crime guns sourced within Canada, RCMP reports say | Canadian Press | By Jim Bronskill

Delaware Supreme Court Set to Rule on Gun Bans for Young Adults | Bearing Arms | By Cam Edwards

Democrats Concede Gun Control Is No Longer Their Top Issue | NOTUS | By Avani Kalra

Florida AG asks judge to end state’s 3-day waiting period | Jacksonville Florida Times-Union | By Steve Patterson

Shootout in Olde Town Square: A Cop, a Killer and a Good Guy With a Gun | New York Times | By Mike Baker

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

That’s what the latest report from a gun industry trade group indicates. The Old Dominion, which doesn’t even crack the top ten in state population, saw more rifle sales than everyone else besides the Lone Star State. So, it’s clear the “assault firearms” ban Governor Abigail Spanberger (D.) signed into law last month is driving Virginians to their local gun stores ahead of its July 1st effective date.

But the law has sparked more than just gun sales. It’s also lit a fire under some of the Commonwealth Attorneys, who’ve declared they won’t enforce the AR-15 sales ban. And now that fire is spreading, with 14 now joining ranks. And that isn’t the only success story bealeagered gun-rights activists can point to in Virginia this week, as they successfully got a state judge to clarify that his injunction against the state’s universal background check law remains in effect despite efforts by the state legislature to invalidate it.

Meanwhile, gun-rights activists elsewhere saw nothing but bad news.

As Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman explains for Reload Members, a Bruen footnote is causing real trouble for cases against federal silencer regulations in a diverse swath of federal circuits. And the next frontier in the legal fight over non-resident gun carry is looking rougher than the last. The nation’s largest gun-rights group is also back in the news with a major development in a potentially devastating internal fight.

Plus, Slate Magazine’s Aymann Ismail details the discrimination he found in New Jersey’s gun permitting system on the podcast. And we have a bunch of other stories down in the links, including a new gun-control group suit against the ATF.

Virginia Gun Sales Double as More State Prosecutors Say They Won’t Enforce AR-15 Ban
By Stephen Gutowski

Virginians have been flooding their local gun stores at a record pace since Governor Abigail Spanberger (D.) signed a sales ban on AR-15s and similar firearms. At the same time, at least 14 state prosecutors have refused to enforce the legislation.

The number of gun-sales-related background checks Virginia processed more than doubled year-over-year in May, according to a National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) report released this week. Virginia ranked second behind Texas on checks related to rifle and shotgun sales, with just a month left before the state ban on sales of most popular models in those categories goes into effect.

Virginia, the twelfth most populous state, landed fourth in overall checks, with 74,959 National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) checks, a 103 percent increase over last May.

Click here to read the rest.

Gun-Rights Groups Warn Virginia Police Against Enforcing Enjoined Background Check Law
By Jake Fogleman

The tension in the legal standoff between gun-rights groups and Virginia officials over the state’s contested background check law has ramped up.

In a new joint letter published Tuesday, the leaders of the Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) and Gun Owners of America (GOA) warned Virginia law enforcement officers and prosecutors that they could face personal liability if they help enforce the state’s universal background check law. The groups argued that a court order blocking the measure last year remains in effect despite recent efforts by state officials to revive it, and that any public servant who enforces the law can expect legal action from the groups.

“Those who might choose to violate their oath of office and shirk their duty to obey lawful court orders should know that GOA and VCDL stand ready to assist Virginians in defense of their constitutional rights, if necessary,” the letter reads.

Click here to read more.

Analysis: How a SCOTUS Footnote Keeps Dooming Silencer Challenges [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman

When the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) issued a landmark decision recognizing a constitutional right to carry firearms and establishing a strict new test for gun-control laws, most gun-rights activists were ecstatic. Little did they know that lower courts would repeatedly invoke that opinion to thwart their efforts to deregulate silencers.

On Wednesday, a three-judge panel for the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously upheld the convictions of Joao DeBorba, an illegal immigrant residing in Washington, under a multitude of federal gun laws. The panel tossed his Second Amendment challenge to the federal gun ban for those subject to domestic violence restraining orders because the Supreme Court foreclosed it in US v. Rahimi. It then tossed his Second Amendment challenge to the federal gun ban for illegal immigrants as foreclosed by the circuit’s own binding precedent.

But most interestingly, it also tossed his Second Amendment challenge to his conviction for possessing an unregistered silencer. There, it held that silencers, more accurately called sound suppressors, are simultaneously unprotected by the text of the Second Amendment and currently subject to a type of regulatory regime that SCOTUS has already okayed.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Wayne LaPierre Loses Appeal Over $4 Million Owed to NRA as Allies Attempt to Spinoff Foundation’s Fortune
By Stephen Gutowski

The National Rifle Association’s (NRA) longtime leader will have to pay the group millions in restitution after losing an appeal, but the internal battle he unleashed has intensified as one arm of the gun group attempts to split off entirely.

On Tuesday, a New York state appellate court panel unanimously ruled against Wayne LaPierre’s attempt to undo the verdict of his 2024 corruption trial. The judges noted LaPierre did not dispute the underlying facts of the case against him, and disagreed that his sentence was beyond the scope of the underlying law. They held that LaPierre still owes the NRA about $4.3 million, and he can’t hold a leadership position at any of its affiliate groups for the next four years.

“We have considered LaPierre’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing,” the panel wrote in an unsigned decision.

The NRA Foundation, currently controlled by LaPierre allies, announced the same day that it plans to officially break off from the broader NRA and rename itself the 1791 Foundation. The move threatens to deal a severe financial blow to the NRA’s overall operations. A copy of the NRA’s 2025 Annual Report, first published by The Reload, indicates the Foundation holds $176 million, or nearly 70 percent, of the organization’s net assets. It also houses about 70 percent of the group’s available cash, with the rest of the NRA holding just $14 million.

Click here to read the rest.

Podcast: Is New Jersey Discriminating Against Minority Gun Owners? (Ft. Slate’s Aymann Ismail)
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, we’re looking into reporting on racism in New Jersey’s gun permitting process.

That’s why we’re talking to Aymann Ismail of Slate Magazine, who both experienced issues with his own gun application and interviewed many other minorities in the same situation. He said a Newark permitting official had withdrawn his first gun purchase permit application against his will over an old trespassing misdemeanor that shouldn’t have disqualified him. It wasn’t until later that he found he wasn’t alone in having trouble getting a license.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I cover a new analysis of crime data that appears to show a further record drop in murder. We also discuss New York Governor Kathy Hochul’s signing of a novel restriction on 3D printers aimed at preventing them from being used to create gun parts.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: The Next Non-Resident Carry Fight Will Be Harder [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman

On the heels of an unbeaten post-Bruen streak that ended blanket state-level bans on non-resident gun-carry permits, advocates have hit a new roadblock in their quest to expand cross-border carry rights.

In a unanimous decision, a three-judge panel for the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals this week dismissed a lawsuit challenging Minnesota’s limited recognition of out-of-state gun-carry permits. Though the state offers non-resident permits, it only recognizes those from 33 states. The plaintiff, a Georgia-based long-haul truck driver with valid yet unrecognized carry permits from Georgia and neighboring Florida, argued that the Second Amendment requires states to recognize the permits of every other state.

The panel of all-Republican-appointed judges for the conservative-leaning circuit unanimously disagreed, which suggests securing national reciprocity via judicial mandate will likely be a tougher hill to climb than doing away with carry permitting processes that aren’t open to out-of-staters.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

Gun control group sues ATF over records release | NPR | By Jaclyn Diaz

Ninth Circuit reconsiders challenge to California restrictions on open carry of firearms | Courthouse News Service | By Alan Riquelmy

OpenAI Sued by Florida’s Attorney General Over Link to Campus Shooting | Wall Street Journal | By Georgia Wells

Transgender Bathroom Protestor Faces Felony Assault Charge, Claims Self-Defense | Cowboy State Daily | By Clair McFarland

Will ATF’s ‘Engaged in the Business’ Repeal Change Much? | The Trace | By Champe Barton and Chip Brownlee

Fifth Circuit Upholds Felon in Possession Ban Against Drug Trafficker

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

That’s the implication of a new report from a leading crime data analyst. The murder rate likely hit an all-time low in 2025, and now it’s declined further in 2026.

Meanwhile, the Department of Justice announced new gun-rights restorations. But, as I explain for Reload Members, they aren’t the restorations activists are waiting for.

New York added to two recent gun policy trends we’ve seen picking up steam in deep blue states by passing a digital gun file ban and a Glock ban. The state took the former a step further by banning not just the distribution of digital gun designs, but even their possession. And it set in motion a ban on the sale of 3D printers that don’t have yet-to-be-created hardware or software blocks on processing gun files.

In Minnesota, a Second Amendment challenge to the state’s refusal to recognize a Georgia long-haul trucker’s concealed-carry permit was tossed by the Eighth Circuit. In Colorado, the state government unveiled its first draft of guns that will fall under last year’s “assault weapons” purchase permit requirement, and it looks a lot like what Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman predicted it would.

Plus, we take gun policy questions from Reload Members on the podcast! And we have a lot of stories in the links below, including a Slate writer’s look at discrimination in New Jersey’s gun-permitting process.

SALE ENDING!!!

It’s officially been five years since we launched The Reload! We launched with a vision of providing sober, serious firearms reporting and analysis as an independent member-funded publication. Five years later, we’ve broken dozens of major news stories and provided consistently ahead-of-the-curve analysis. We’ve also regularly achieved the highest possible rating a news outlet can get from watchdogs like Ad Fontes Media and earned numerous reporting awards. And we’ve maintained our independence thanks to the support of our members!

If you’d like to take the leap to join our membership (and get EXCLUSIVE access to hundreds of pieces of reporting and analysis), we’ve rolled back our prices to what they were when we launched!

This is your last chance to get 30% off! Take the dive and help support independent, informed reporting!

GET 30% OFF YOUR FIRST YEAR

Report: America On Track for Lowest Murder Rate Ever
By Stephen Gutowski

Murder in America has been plummeting for years and is now on pace to reach an all-time low, according to a leading crime data analyst.

On Monday, AH Datalytics Founder Jeff Asher reported the murder rate appears to again be in significant decline through the first half of 2026. He noted that his company’s real-time crime data tracker has identified a drop in murders across the nation’s largest police departments. He said last year’s rate was already low, but this year could improve on that.

“The US likely set a record for the lowest murder rate ever recorded in 2025,” Asher wrote in his report, “but even if it didn’t then a record low feels like a foregone conclusion sitting here in the first half of 2026.”

Click here to read more.

Analysis: Where is DOJ’s Gun-Rights Restoration Plan? [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

There’s news on the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) rights restoration efforts, but not the kind most activists are waiting to hear.

On Thursday, the DOJ announced a new batch of rights restorations. However, it was limited to just four people, and the DOJ backdated it to the tenure of former Attorney General Pam Bondi.

“The former Attorney General had reviewed all the relevant facts for each individual listed below, including the materials that each individual submitted seeking either a pardon or relief from Federal firearms disabilities, and it was established to her satisfaction that each individual will not be likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety and that the granting of the relief to each individual would not be contrary to the public interest,” Trent McCotter, Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General, wrote in the announcement. “Accordingly, on March 30, 2026, the former Attorney General granted relief from Federal firearms disabilities to these individuals pursuant to section 925(c).”

The announcement didn’t provide any updates on the DOJ’s plan to standardize the rights restoration process. DOJ did not respond to The Reload‘s questions about the announced restorations or the broader proposed process. So, seven months after the comment period ended, what is going on with DOJ’s plan?

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access!

New York Bans Digital Gun Files, Aims at 3D-Printers Capable of Using Them
By Shiv Parihar

Empire State lawmakers have moved to criminalize digital blueprints used to 3D-print firearm parts and the printers that can read them as part of a gun-control package that also targeted popular Glock pistols.

Governor Kathy Hochul (D.) signed the measure into law on Wednesday as part of the state’s budget bill. It sets up a ban on the sale of 3D printers that aren’t equipped with yet-to-be-developed software or hardware that blocks the printing of firearms frames or receivers, unless the buyer has state and federal firearms industry licenses. It bans the distribution or sale of digital gun design files and pistols that feature a “cruciform trigger bar,” such as the popular Glock handgun lineup. It further bans the mere possession of those gun design files by anyone who intends to use them to make firearms or other items, like machinegun conversion devices commonly called “Glock switches,” without a gun manufacturer’s license.

“When I took office, I made a promise to New Yorkers to attack the gun violence epidemic head-on, and as gun technology continues to evolve, so do our strongest-in-the-nation gun laws,” Hochul said in a statement about the proposals earlier this year.

Click here to read the rest.

Eighth Circuit Dismisses Challenge to Minnesota Gun Carry Reciprocity Restrictions
By Jake Fogleman

Minnesota can ignore certain gun-carry permits without violating the Second Amendment, a federal appeals court has ruled.

A unanimous three-judge panel for the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals on Tuesday ruled against Jeffrey Johnson Sr., a Georgia resident who sued Minnesota over its refusal to recognize out-of-state gun-carry permits. The panel determined that rules governing the interstate recognition of carry permits do not even implicate the plain text of the Second Amendment–a key metric under the Supreme Court’s landmark ruling in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen.

“Johnson’s Second Amendment challenge fails at Bruen step one because Minnesota’s reciprocity statute, standing alone, does not regulate arms-bearing conduct,” Judge L. Steven Grasz wrote in Johnson v. Jacobson. “We affirm the district court’s dismissal of Johnson’s Second Amendment claim.”

Click here to continue reading.

Podcast: We Answer Your Gun Politics Questions
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, we’re taking gun policy and politics questions from our members.

It’s been a while since we’ve done a Q&A, and quite a lot has happened. So, we’re answering everything we can fit into an hour-long podcast. Turns out that’s a lot!

Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I tackle all sorts of topics. We cover everything from the latest on the Department of Justice lawsuits against Colorado and Denver’s magazine and AR-15 bans to the Supreme Court’s appetite for new Second Amendment cases to the future of the National Firearms Act. We also discuss the ATF rule changing record-keeping requirements for background checks.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is also available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I cover the Second Circuit striking down New York’s default ban on licensed carry in publicly accessible private property. We also discuss the absence of gun policy in public opinion polls, the ATF’s assurances to trans gun owners regarding its proposed gender rule, and the rise in Virginia prosecutors pledging not to enforce the state’s “assault firearm” ban.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: An Early Look at Colorado’s Semi-Auto Restriction Regime [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman

Colorado’s novel approach to regulating AR-15s and other semi-automatic firearms shed the “assault weapon” ban, raising questions about how many guns will be swept into its net as its effective date draws nearer. Now, the state has offered its first answer.

Earlier this month, the Colorado Department of Revenue’s Firearms Dealer Division quietly published draft guidance identifying which firearms will be classified as “Specified Semiautomatic Firearms” as defined under a piece of legislation signed into law by Governor Jared Polis (D.) last spring. The result is a sprawling 152-page document listing hundreds of different makes and models of various rifles, shotguns, and pistols—including several weapons platforms not captured by most other “assault weapon” bans.

The weapons identified matter because, beginning August 1, 2026, it will be a crime for anyone in Colorado to transfer or purchase any of them without first undergoing an extensive new permitting and training process—the first of its kind for firearm purchases in the state.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

When I decided I might want a gun, I answered truthfully on the application’s “race” question. I soon learned what I’d done. | Slate | By Aymann Ismail

Gun shops see surge in sales as Maryland limits Glocks | Baltimore Sun | By Lily Carey

Virginia State Police to resume background checks on private gun sales | Virginia Scope | By Brandon Jarvis

Ontario government joins Supreme Court challenge of ‘assault-style’ firearms ban | Toronto Star | By Mark Ramzy

Sig Sauer must face NY police detective’s lawsuit claiming gun fired on its own | Reuters | By Jonathan Stempel

Minnesota’s appeals court won’t reinstate law that banned binary triggers | MPR News | By Dana Ferguson

Leading Colorado gun control advocate wants more | Axios | By John Frank and Robert Sanchez

Initiative to Ban Hunting and Fishing in Oregon Is One Step Closer to Making the Ballot | Outdoor Life | By Dac Collins

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

As Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman details, the Second Circuit delivered a mixed ruling. It struck down New York’s law reversing the assumption that publicly accessible private property is open to licensed gun carriers. But it also upheld another of the state’s sweeping gun-carry restrictions.

Then I take a close look at what the latest polling indicates about how guns will play into the 2026 midterms. It’s a similar story to the 2024 election, it seems.

Plus, there’s been a new development in Virginia. Some local prosecutors are vowing not to enforce the state’s new “assault firearms” ban when it goes into effect over the summer. And Jake does a deep dive into the legal challenges that have already cropped up against the ban.

Meanwhile, we have ATF Chief Counsel Robert Leider on the podcast to discuss the gun rule package he’s spearheading. He also directly responds to concerns that the gender ID rule change is a backdoor trans gun ban. And we have a bunch of additional stories down in the links, including one where black activists claim the government is targeting their gun licenses.

Second Circuit Strikes Down New York ‘Vampire Rule’
By Jake Fogleman

The Empire State may not presumptively ban licensed gun carriers from bringing their weapons onto all publicly accessible private property.

That’s the conclusion drawn by a three-judge panel for the Second Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday. The panel unanimously affirmed a lower court ruling preventing New York officials from requiring gun carriers to get affirmative consent before entering public establishments like stores and restaurants while armed, a legal provision dubbed a “Vampire Rule” by its opponents. It ruled that such a requirement lacked the valid historical precedent required by the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment test.

“We conclude that the Private Property Provision, as applied to private property open to the public, is unconstitutional because the State did not carry its burden of demonstrating that the restriction falls within our Nation’s historical tradition of gun regulations, as required under the framework set forth in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen,” Judge Joseph Bianco wrote in Christian v. James.

Click here to read more.

Analysis: Voters Put Guns Way Down the Totem Poll Headed into the Midterms [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

The midterm elections are fast approaching, and gun politics have little salience.

Among the three major polls to ask people about their top issues that were released the past week, none of them registered a gun-related response higher than tied for second-to-last place. Polls from Quinnipiac University and The Economist/YouGov show just two percent of respondents ranked guns as their top issue.

Meanwhile, Echelon Insights reported just one percent of the 1,008 likely voters they asked had guns as their top issue. That was tied for last place.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access!

ATF Says Gender ID Rule Change Isn’t a Trans Gun Ban
By Stephen Gutowski

The Trump Administration isn’t trying to bar transgender or non-binary people from owning guns, according to a top official at the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).

In an exclusive interview with The Reload, ATF Chief Counsel Robert Leider rejected the idea that a new rule requiring gun buyers to put their biological sex at birth on any ATF form is an attempt to deny gun sales to anyone. While the rule rejects the “concept of gender identity” and requires applicants to select their “immutable biological classification as either male or female,” Leider said that won’t bar trans people from purchasing or owning firearms. He insisted that the rule is “just a matter of coordinating which sex somebody selects on the form.”

“No, not at all,” Leider said when asked if the rule was a backdoor trans gun ban. “I don’t even see how that could possibly be the case. I mean, it’s not at all.”

Click here to read the full story.

Some Virginia Prosecutors Refuse to Enforce New Gun Bans
By Shiv Parihar

At least four Virginia Commonwealth’s Attorneys say they will not enforce Virginia’s new “assault firearms” and magazine bans.

Commonwealth’s Attorneys in Spotsylvania, Smyth, Powhatan, and Pulåski counties announced over the past week they would not pursue cases arising from the bills Governor Abigail Spanberger (D.) signed last Thursday. The four prosecutors argued the law is either unconstitutional or, at least, constitutionally questionable, and they can’t enforce it.

“I took an oath to uphold both the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of Virginia,” Smyth County Commonwealth’s Attorney Phillip Blevins Jr. wrote in a letter to local law enforcement. “That oath requires more than mechanical enforcement of statutes. I must exercise prosecutorial discretion, constitutional judgment, and fidelity to the rule of law. As such, my office will not support criminal charges resulting solely from technical violations of the unconstitutional assault weapon ban.”

Click here to read the rest.

Podcast: ATF Chief Counsel Robert Leider Explains the Bureau’s New Gun Rules
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, we’re speaking directly to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF).

The bureau just released dozens of new gun rule proposals. We’ve examined the details of them ourselves, we’ve discussed them with representatives of the gun industry, and now we’re hearing directly from the man who spearheaded the effort. That’s ATF Chief Counsel Robert Leider.

larger swings the bureau took under the Biden Administration couldn’t.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger signing bans on so-called assault weapons and magazines capable of holding more than 15 rounds into law. We also talk about the latest financial reports for the NRA, which reveal plenty of signs of improvement for the group but also some risks.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: Virginia’s Hardware Bans are Now Law. What Does the Path Forward for Legal Challenges Look Like? [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman

After weeks of waiting, the political fight over Virginia’s proposed “assault weapon” and magazine bans is now over. The legal battle to undo those bans is just beginning.

Late Thursday night, Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger (D.) ended the suspense by officially signing into law a pair of bills banning the sale of AR-15s and other popular semi-automatic firearms, along with magazines capable of holding more than 15 rounds. Mere moments later, the first in a wave of lawsuits challenging those new restrictions began pouring in.

Generally speaking, those suits fell into two camps: those filed in federal court and those filed in Virginia state court. Each venue poses distinct opportunities but also real challenges that gun-rights advocates will have to contend with in their quest to regain the right to purchase AR-15s and the magazines that come standard with them in Old Dominion.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

Minnesota legislative session ends with no House vote on gun control bill | CBS News | By Aki Nace

Missouri schools could hire armed ‘rangers’ under bill sent to governor | Missouri Independent | By Annelise Hanshaw

New Federal Lawsuit Filed Against Illinois FOID Card Requirements | Fox News | By Robert McGreevy

Gun rights groups see ‘golden age’ under Trump administration | NPR | Jaclyn Diaz

Police Seized Guns From Home of Mosque Shooter After Alarming Behavior | New York Times | By Orlando Mayorquín, Tim Arango, and Chelsia Rose Marcius

Visibly Armed, They Patrolled the Streets to Protest ICE. Now Their Gun Licenses Are Being Revoked. | The Trace | By Mensah Dean

Charges Dismissed for Virginia Ex-Assistant Principal After Shooting by 6-Year-Old | New York Times | By Chris Hippensteel and Jackson Landers

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

There are positives in the National Rifle Association’s Annual Report that new leadership can point to, but the overall picture is fairly mixed. Costs are down, especially legal costs, but so are member dues. Plus, as reporter Shiv Parihar explains to Reload Members, the report also details what amounts to an existential threat posed by its ongoing internal strife.

We also got an update on gun sales in Virginia. They’re surging to remarkable heights as residents prepare for the coming AR-15 and ammo magazine ban--which, Governor Abigail Spanberger (D.) signed into law late last night. Virginia’s rifle sales are way, way above where they normally would be as a result.

Ukraine’s internal debate over gun ownership has intensified as well. We’ve got an on-the-ground report from Kateryna Antonenko, a reporter with The Counteroffensive, that details the different perspectives on what the war-torn nation should approach civilian gun ownership.

Meanwhile, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman takes a deep dive into the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) new Colorado gun-rights suits. He explains, for Reload Members, the advantages DOJ has going into the litigation as well as the one big limitation it faces.

Plus, the National Shooting Sports Foundation’s Larry Keane joins the podcast to give the industry’s view of the ATF’s gun rule package. And we have more stories than usual down in the links, including a look at the ACLU’s recent evolution on the Second Amendment.

5TH ANNIVERSARY SALE

It’s officially been five years since we launched The Reload! We launched with a vision of providing sober, serious firearms reporting and analysis as an independent member-funded publication. Five years later, we’ve broken dozens of major news stories and provided consistently ahead-of-the-curve analysis. We’ve also regularly achieved the highest possible rating a news outlet can get from watchdogs like Ad Fontes Media and earned numerous reporting awards. And we’ve maintained our independence thanks to the support of our members!

If you’d like to take the leap to join our membership (and get EXCLUSIVE access to hundreds of pieces of reporting and analysis), we’ve rolled back our prices to what they were when we launched! The sale ends soon!

GET 30% OFF YOUR FIRST YEAR

NRA Slashed Legal Costs, Stalled Decline Despite Continued Member Dues Drop
By Stephen Gutowski

The National Rifle Association (NRA) grew its assets and cut its expenses, especially legal costs, in 2025, but its membership income still shrank.

A copy of the group’s 2025 Annual Report, which details the combined finances of the NRA’s seven related legal entities, shows that it saw modest year-over-year growth in overall assets combined with a 16.8 percent decline in liabilities to produce a 13.7 percent improvement to $257,023,32 in total net assets. The report, handed out at the group’s annual meeting and obtained by The Reload, indicates the overall improvements came despite a 7.2 percent drop in member dues and an 18.7 percent decline in contributions, leading to a 13.6 percent drop in overall revenue.

The most significant expense cuts came to the group’s administrative legal spending after its New York corruption concluded, and the law firm that formulated its defense, a common target of the reformers who’ve taken control of the NRA, ended its representation of the group.

Click here to read the full report.

NRA Warns Foundation Fight Could Have Devastating Financial Effects [Member Exclusive]
By Shiv Parihar

The National Rifle Association’s (NRA) leaders warn that the group could lose control over $176 million, the vast majority of its net assets, if it loses its lawsuit against its own foundation.

The warning comes in the NRA’s latest Annual Report, which The Reload obtained and published on Friday. NRA leaders cautioned that “an unfavorable outcome could affect management’s conclusion that the NRA continues to maintain control over the Foundation.” They went on to claim the Foundation’s leaders, who largely consist of disgraced former NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre’s longtime allies, are acting against the overall group’s interests and have effectively insulated themselves from oversight through improper rule changes.

“The NRA believes that amendments to the Foundation’s Articles of Incorporation and the by-laws were not made in accordance with the Foundation’s own governance procedures and did not follow regulatory and legal requirements prescribed by District of Columbia law,” said the report’s section on the lawsuit.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other pieces!

Virginia Jumps to Second in Rifle Sales as AR-15 Ban Looms
By Jake Fogleman

Virginians aren’t waiting to find out whether their governor will sign a ban on the sales of popular semi-automatic firearms and the ammunition magazines that come with them before flooding into their local gun stores.

Newly released industry data revealed that Virginia is punching even further above its weight than ever before when it comes to the number of gun-sales-related background checks. As a pair of bills to ban the sale of “assault firearms,” such as AR-15s, and magazines capable of holding more than 15 rounds await action on Governor Abigail Spanberger’s (D.) desk, Virginians purchased enough firearms last month to land the state in fourth place among all states, and second place for long gun sales, despite being the twelfth most populous state.

The state also saw a surge in checks for highly regulated National Firearms Act (NFA) items, with 18,538, trailing only Texas in April.

Click here to read more.

Ukrainians Debate Whether They Should Liberalize Civilian Gun Ownership
By Kateryna Antonenko

KYIV, Ukraine — If Oleksandr and Viktor happened to cross paths, they would probably not get along on this one issue.

Both of them have seen the war firsthand and have held weapons in their hands, but their views sharply diverge: should Ukrainians be allowed to carry them in everyday life?

Oleksandr, who was once categorically opposed to the idea, now fully supports the right to bear arms for civilians.

Viktor, on the other hand, realized after serving in the army that owning a gun is not as simple as it seems from the outside.

The mass shooting in Kyiv on April 18, which left seven people dead and as many injured, has once again split society on whether the Ukrainian government should legalize civilian firearms for self-defense, and if the risks of legalization are worth it.

Click here to read the rest.

Podcast: How ATF’s New Regulations Change the Gun Industry (Ft. NSSF’s Larry Keane)
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, we’re looking at what makes up the bulk of the ATF’s new gun rule package: industry regulations.

To discuss how the rulemaking will impact gun makers, importers, and retailers, we have Larry Keane of the National Shooting Sports Foundation (NSSF) on the show. NSSF is the gun industry’s trade group, which represents most of the major gun brands in America. Keane said the ATF’s proposed changes are the most significant he’s seen, and he outlined some of the rules he believes will have the greatest impact.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I break down the terms of the ATF’s most significant consumer-facing rule proposals and discuss the likely impact for gun buyers. We also cover the DOJ’s latest Second Amendment lawsuit filed against the City of Denver and the State of Colorado concerning their bans on AR-15s and ammunition magazines.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: DOJ’s Colorado Gun Suits Are Up Against the Clock [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman

The Trump Administration just gave gun-rights advocates another boost in their quest to overturn AR-15 and magazine bans nationwide. But the success of its latest endeavor may hinge on a race against the political calendar.

In a span of 48 hours, the Department of Justice (DOJ) this week officially added two new hardware ban cases to its list of actions taken on behalf of gun owners. On Tuesday, the department filed suit against the City of Denver’s 1989 municipal ban on so-called assault weapons. Just one day later, the DOJ filed a lawsuit against Colorado’s statewide ban on magazines capable of holding more than 15 rounds of ammunition.

Taken together, the actions mark the splashiest legal intervention to date by the new Second Amendment Section within the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division. While the DOJ has filed briefs supporting third-party challenges to similar AR-15 bans in Illinois and New Jersey, threatened to sue over Virginia’s proposed ban, and even filed a similar suit against Washington, DC’s assault weapon ban, the combination of lawsuits filed in Colorado represents a comprehensive broadside against both major categories of hardware bans that gun-rights advocates most take issue with.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

How the ACLU Started Defending the Second Amendment | Reason | By Jacob Sullum

A Gun Derailed My Childhood. As an Adult, I Found Relief at the Range. | New York Times Magazine | By Reginald Dwayne Betts

Minnesota justices question reach of gun ban for those deemed ‘mental defective’ | Courthouse News Service | By Ryan Luetkemeyer

New Jersey Court Okays Double Standard, Says Cops Can Use Marijuana and Still Possess Guns | Bearing Arms | By Cam Edwards

Bombing suspect lost guns under Oregon ‘red flag’ law | The Oregonian | By Noelle Crombie and Austin De Dios

ATF stripped licenses from fewer gun shops in 2025 | USA Today | By Nick Penzenstadler

A Top Analyst Explains Why America’s Second ‘Great Crime Decline’ Could Already Be Here | The Trace | By Chip Brownlee

Where Did All the AK-47s Go? | New York Times | By Thomas Gibbons-Neff

Gunman shot by trooper and civilian after opening fire in Cambridge | CBS News | By Matt Schooley, Louisa Moller, and Kristina Rex

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

The complete text of the rules hews closely to the summaries the ATF released last week. So, the rules Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman identified as likely most important for Reload Members in Sunday’s newsletter do appear to be the most significant. Those include the official rollbacks of the biggest ATF rules of the last decade, added protections for people traveling across state lines with their guns, and numerous tweaks meant to streamline the gun buying process.

I explain what gun buying might look like this time next year in an exclusive analysis piece for Reload members. Then, on the podcast, the Second Amendment Foundation’s Kostas Moros gives his take on the proposed changes and explains why gun-rights activists are happy about them.

The ATF wasn’t the only section of the Department of Justice to make a significant splash in gun news, though. The Civil Rights Division filed two new suits in Colorado over the state’s magazine ban and Denver’s AR-15 ban.

Plus, down in the links section, we have a bunch of other stories--including several on the mounting efforts to regulate 3D-printers in hopes of controlling who can print guns.

5TH ANNIVERSARY SALE

It’s officially been five years since we launched The Reload! We launched with a vision of providing sober, serious firearms reporting and analysis as an independent member-funded publication. Five years later, we’ve broken dozens of major news stories and provided consistently ahead-of-the-curve analysis. We’ve also regularly achieved the highest possible rating a news outlet can get from watchdogs like Ad Fontes Media and earned numerous reporting awards. And we’ve maintained our independence thanks to the support of our members!

If you’d like to take the leap to join our membership (and get EXCLUSIVE access to hundreds of pieces of reporting and analysis), we’ve rolled back our prices to what they were when we launched! The sale won’t last much longer, though. So, if you’re interested, take the leap today and join the Reload Membership!

GET 30% OFF YOUR FIRST YEAR

ATF Publishes Details of Major Gun Rule Rollbacks
By Jake Fogleman

Three of the most significant federal gun regulations of the last decade could soon officially disappear.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) on Tuesday released the first 21 of its forthcoming slate of proposed and final rules to the Federal Register. Among the first batch of rules are rescissions of several marquee firearm regulations from the prior two presidential administrations, like the Biden-era “engaged in the business” and “stabilizing braces” rules, as well as the first Trump Administration’s attempt to ban bump stocks by reclassifying them as machine guns under federal law.

Click here to read more.

ATF Moves to Expand Protections for Traveling Across State Lines with Guns
By Stephen Gutowski

The federal government is looking to clarify the rules around transporting guns and ammunition across state lines.

On Wednesday, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) published a new proposal reinterpreting what protections federal law offers gun owners while traveling. The proposal would codify a more expansive view of what it means to “transport” a gun through states beyond where the owner lives, even if local laws bar the person from possessing the gun there on an ongoing basis. The ATF rule would add several additional scenarios for those traveling with firearms.

“[F]or purposes of transporting firearms interstate, any activities that are reasonably necessary to transportation such as staying overnight in temporary lodging, stopping for food, fuel, vehicle maintenance, an emergency, or medical treatment, or transiting between modes of transportation, are considered ‘transport’ and thus protected by the Gun Control Act provision that addresses interstate transport of firearms,” the ATF proposal said.

Click here to continue reading.

Analysis: How the ATF is Trying to Streamline Gun Buying [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

The way most Americans buy guys is likely about to significantly change in significant and noticeable ways.

On Thursday, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) posted the full text for the final batch of its latest proposed rule changes. The package, which includes 32 different regulations, seeks to streamline the gun-buying process on several fronts. It looks to simplify and digitize the background check process, with one rule opening up the possibility of moving it to a completely virtual operation.

So, what will gun purchases look like if these rules are ultimately adopted?

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access!

DOJ Sues Over Colorado AR-15, Ammo Magazine Bans
By Shiv Parihar

The Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed lawsuits against Denver’s ban on so-called assault weapons and Colorado’s statewide ban on magazines capable of holding more than 15 rounds.

On Tuesday, DOJ filed suit against Denver’s AR-15 possession ban. Then, on Wednesday, DOJ filed a second lawsuit against Colorado’s magazine sales ban. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche framed the moves as part of a broader nationwide push from the Trump Administration to protect gun rights.

“The Constitution is not a suggestion and the Second Amendment is not a second-class right,” Blanche said in a statement. “Denver’s ban on commonly owned semi-automatic rifles directly violates the right to bear arms.”

Read the rest here.

Gun Groups Chime In On New ATF Rules
By Shiv Parihar

Leading organizations on either side of the firearms debate have joined the fray after the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms (ATF) announced a slew of new gun regulations.

On Wednesday, newly confirmed ATF Director Robert Cekada signed dozens of new rules moments after the Senate took a bipartisan vote to confirm him. Both sides of the gun debate reacted within hours, with the National Rifle Association (NRA) dubbing it “the biggest one-day regulatory overhaul in the agency’s history” and Giffords calling the day the package was signed “a great day if you sell illegal guns or commit crime.”

“When you add it up, no modern presidential administration, and perhaps no presidential administration in history, has been as affirmatively pro-gun as the Trump Administration,” the NRA said in a statement.

Click here to read the full story.

Podcast: What Does ATF’s New Gun Rule Package Do? (Ft. SAF’s Kostas Moros)
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, the ATF dropped the largest package of new gun rules in its history.

On Wednesday, the ATF got a new director and dozens of new gun rules to boot. The bureau announced 32 new rule proposals that directly implicate firearms in one way or another. Director Rob Cekada signed those rules in front of a collection of gun-rights groups–including our guest Kostas Moros’s Second Amendment Foundation (SAF).

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I talk about the Senate’s confirmation of Robert Cekada to be the ATF’s new permanent director and his early participation in the agency’s announced package of 34 new rules largely related to loosening gun restrictions. We also discuss the ongoing confusion over the legal status of Virginia’s universal background check regime.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: The Most Significant New ATF Gun Rules [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman

Bolstered by a new permanent director at the helm, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) kicked off its “new era of reform” this week.

At a press conference on Wednesday featuring Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, ATF Chief Counsel Robert Leider, and representatives from nearly every major gun-rights and industry group in the country, newly confirmed ATF Director Robert Cekada approved 34 agency rulemaking proposals. That’s more rules than ATF has issued in “the past 15 years combined,” according to Blanche.

Formal rule language for each of the announced regulatory changes is still forthcoming, but the ATF did publish summaries for each of the proposed actions in the interim. As things currently stand, here are some of the most high-profile and potentially consequential rule changes that gun owners can expect.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

ChatGPT Wrestles With Its Most Chilling Conversation: How Do I Plan an Attack? | Wall Street Journal | By Georgia Wells

Supreme Court declines hearing Chicago gun sales case | The Center Square | By Andrew Rice

Beretta Holding and Ruger Agree to Partnership | American Rifleman | By Frank Minter

First Circuit Rules Federal Ban on Noncitizen Gun Possession Constitutional | Bloomberg Law | By Mallory Culhane

Fourth Circuit upholds January 6er’s unregistered silencer conviction | Courthouse News Service | By Joe Dodson

Gov. Jared Polis signs amended bill banning 3D-printing guns | Denver Post | By Nick Coltrain

The Government Doesn’t Just Want to Ban Ghost Guns. It Wants to Control Your 3D Printer | PCMag | By Michael Lydick

Connecticut legislature passes bill banning Glock-style pistols | NBC Connecticut | By Jennifer Lambert

Minnesota Senate approves gun control package, but it’s unlikely to pass House | Minnesota Reformer | By Michelle Griffith

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

As we first reported, the ATF announced a package of 34 new rules in the moments after the Senate confirmed Trump’s pick, Robert Cekada, to helm the agency in a bipartisan vote. The exact details of the package haven’t yet been posted, but its general form was described in a press conference I attended on Wednesday. As I explain for Reload Members, my question for the Acting Attorney General came down to legal strategy and whether these rules will have more staying power than the big swings the agency has taken in the recent past.

We also have an update to one of Virginia’s latest gun-control laws, which brings more confusion than clarity. The Virginia State Police told us they haven’t taken a position on whether they can legally resume private-sale background checks despite sending an alert to gun dealers in the state saying otherwise. They’ve promised more details soon, but won’t say if they’re conducting the checks or not right now.

Meanwhile, we saw some interesting developments in the courts. As Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman writes for members, a federal appeals court delivered a mixed ruling on Colorado’s gun law but a clear rebuke of the “one weird trick” reasoning for upholding restrictions. And the Supreme Court may have tipped its hand in US v Hemani based on what it just decided to do in another weed-and-guns challenge.

Plus, Cam Edwards of Bearing Arms joins the podcast for a deep dive into where Virginia’s huge gun-control package stands now. And we have a number of other stories down in the links, including my latest piece at The Dispatch on why Jeffrey Epstein’s list of crimes may include federal firearms violations.

5TH ANNIVERSARY SALE

It’s officially been five years since we launched The Reload! We launched with a vision of providing sober, serious firearms reporting and analysis as an independent member-funded publication. Five years later, we’ve broken dozens of major news stories and provided consistently ahead-of-the-curve analysis. We’ve also regularly achieved the highest possible rating a news outlet can get from watchdogs like Ad Fontes Media and earned numerous reporting awards. And we’ve maintained our independence thanks to the support of our members!

If you’d like to take the leap to join our membership (and get EXCLUSIVE access to hundreds of pieces of reporting and analysis), we’ve rolled back our prices to what they were when we launched!

GET 30% OFF YOUR FIRST YEAR

Trump ATF Director Signs 34 Gun Rule Changes Moments After Bipartisan Confirmation
By Stephen Gutowski

Washington, DC -- In his first official act after being confirmed, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) Director Robert Cekada signed dozens of new gun regulation changes.

Backed by representatives from nearly every major gun-rights group, from the National Rifle Association to the Second Amendment Foundation to Gun Owners of America, Cekada approved 34 rulemaking proposals handed to him by Chief Counsel Robert Leider. The ATF pushed back the event two hours to allow for the Senate to finish its confirmation vote, where Cekada received a yes from every Republican present and seven Democrats. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche sold the package, which seeks to repeal some regulations and modernize others, as part of a sea change in how the ATF operates.

“It is fitting in my mind that the first action Rob is going to take today in his new role is to sign the most comprehensive regulatory reform package in the history of ATF,” Blanche said while introducing Cekada.

Click here to read more.

Analysis: Risk vs Reward in ATF Rulemaking [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

On Wednesday, I asked the Acting Attorney General whether the package of new ATF rules was designed to push the boundaries of the law or to hold up to legal scrutiny.

After all, at least some of these rules are bound to face lawsuits. Many of the biggest ATF regulatory swings of the past decade, whether it’s the bumpstock ban or the pistol brace ban, have been struck down by the federal courts--up to and including the Supreme Court. The bigger the swing, the harder the whiff. So, did the Department of Justice take that into account when developing this 34-rule package?

Here’s what AG Todd Blanche said:

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access!

Virginia State Police Say They Take No Position on Background Check Law Despite Alert to Gun Dealers
By Stephen Gutowski

The Old Dominion’s police force has not decided how it will handle a legal dispute over the new law meant to reinstate its universal background check program.

The Virginia State Police (VSP) told The Reload on Wednesday that it has not determined how it will respond to the passage of HB1525. That bill bans anyone under 21 years old from buying handguns in an attempt to remedy the state’s background check law, which a judge found unconstitutionally burdened the rights of 18-to-20-year-olds by providing too few legal paths to purchase pistols. The VSP said it did not have a position on the bill, despite sending an alert to gun dealers in the state to that end earlier this week.

“Virginia State Police does not have an official position on HB1525 and background checks at this time,” Robin Lawson, VSP Public Relations Director, told The Reload.

Click here to read the rest.

SCOTUS Turns Away Weed and Guns Case Despite DOJ Request
By Jake Fogleman

The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) may have just tipped its hand on how it plans to rule on marijuana use and the Second Amendment.

In its Monday orders list, the Court declined to take up the case US v. Doucet. That was a Department of Justice (DOJ) appeal of a Fifth Circuit ruling that tossed a Louisiana woman’s indictment for possessing a firearm despite previously being convicted of a felony for “attempted cultivation of marijuana.” The DOJ had asked the Court to address its appeal after the justices issued a decision in their current marijuana and guns case, US v. Hemani.

None of the justices wrote separately to comment on the denial.

Click here to read more.

Podcast: Where Virginia’s Gun Laws Now Stand (Ft. Cam Edwards)
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, we’re examining where the big push for new gun restrictions in Virginia has ended up.

The legislature has finished its job. So, we have fellow-Virginian and gun commentator Cam Edwards from Bearing Arms on the show to go over where things stand.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss the Trump administration’s official reclassification of marijuana under the Controlled Substances Act and what it could mean for legal marijuana users who wish to own guns.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: No ‘One Weird Trick’ Argument for ‘Ghost Gun’ Bans [Member Exclusives]
By Jake Fogleman

A federal appeals court may not have sided with gun-rights advocates in blocking Colorado’s attempt to ban “ghost guns.” But it did rule out a particularly tendentious rationale for upholding at least some parts of it.

A three-judge panel for the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday delivered a mixed ruling for a group of gun-rights advocates challenging the Centennial State’s ban on the manufacture, purchase, and possession of firearms, frames, and receivers lacking serial numbers. The National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR) had asked the panel to revisit a lower court decision denying its request to preliminarily enjoin the law back in May 2024.

While the panel opted to side with the lower court on certain aspects of the Colorado law, it did hold that the district court “abused its discretion” in denying their request for an injunction on the law’s possession ban, which it previously upheld as falling entirely outside of the Second Amendment’s plain text.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

Add Potential Gun Crimes to Epstein’s Sordid Legacy | The Dispatch | By Stephen Gutowski

Maryland Supreme Court Strikes Down Local Gun Control Laws | Bearing Arms | By Cam Edwards

Minnesota struggles to justify switchblade ban in court | Courthouse News Service | By Ryan Luetkemeyer

What the data says about gun deaths in the U.S. | Pew Research Center | By John Gramlich

Tennessee lawmakers pass bill to allow deadly force in defense of property | Tennessean | By Peter Burditt

House Republicans Reject Trump’s ATF Budget Increase, Counter With $285 Million Cut and Pro-Gun Riders | USA Carry | By Luke McCoy

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

This week, the Democratically-controlled statehouse rejected some of Governor Abigail Spanberger’s most significant requests. But, as I explain for Reload members, the final gun policy changes are still extremely substantial. Eleven new gun-control bills have already made it across the finish line, even if two of the most substantial are at least technically still in limbo.

The Trump Administration was also busy this week. It published its final order reclassifying some kinds of marijuana to make it easier to legally use, but it also told the Supreme Court that change doesn’t impact its prosecution of the defendant in the Court’s pending weed and guns case. Elsewhere, in Maryland, there was also a new multi-million-dollar settlement between a gun dealer and the city of Baltimore, where the former promised to stop selling “ghost gun” parts. And Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman looks at what comes next now that non-resident carry permits are technically available in every state.

Plus, Philip Van Cleave of the Virginia Citizens Defense League gives his view of the state’s new gun policies and how he plans to fight them on the podcast. We’re also celebrating our 5th anniversary with a sale! And we have more stories than usual down in the links section, including one on suspicions that ChatGPT helped plan a school shooting.

5TH ANNIVERSARY SALE

It’s officially been five years since we launched The Reload! We launched with a vision of providing sober, serious firearms reporting and analysis as an independent member-funded publication. Five years later, we’ve broken dozens of major news stories and provided consistently ahead-of-the-curve analysis. We’ve also regularly achieved the highest possible rating a news outlet can get from watchdogs like Ad Fontes Media and earned numerous reporting awards. And we’ve maintained our independence thanks to the support of our members!

If you’d like to take the leap to join our membership (and get EXCLUSIVE access to hundreds of pieces of reporting and analysis), we’ve rolled back our prices to what they were when we launched!

GET 30% OFF YOUR FIRST YEAR

Virginia Legislature Rejects Governor Spanberger’s Requests to Tighten Ammo Mag Restrictions, Hospital Gun Ban
By Stephen Gutowski

Some of Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger’s most aggressive suggested gun policy changes won’t be happening.

On Wednesday, the state Senate and House of Delegates rejected multiple recommendations she sent over. The votes unravel what would have been an effective ban on the carry of magazines that hold more than 15 rounds, a restriction above and beyond what the legislature initially proposed. The votes also declined to strip an exception to the mental health hospital gun ban.

The bills the legislature refused to change will now head back to the Governor’s desk, where she can sign them, veto them, or take no action and allow them to become law.

Click here to read the rest.

Analysis: Where Virginia’s Gun-Control Legislation Now Stands [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

The legislative season in Virginia is nearing the finish line, and the state’s gun policies have shifted substantially--more substantially than any other state in 2026.

On Wednesday, the Democratically-controlled state legislature decided on nine different recommendations for gun policy changes offered up by Democratic Governor Abigail Spanberger. That was after Spanberger already signed another four gun-control bills in the preceding weeks. The package represents the biggest change to The Old Dominion’s gun regulations in a very long time, but not everything that was proposed made it across the finish line (including several of Spanberger’s biggest asks), and some of the biggest changes still haven’t become law yet.

So, where do things stand now? Which bills have become law? Which are still pending, and what’s likely to happen to them?

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access!

Trump Administration Reschedules Marijuana, Tells SCOTUS No Impact on Weed and Guns Case
By Stephen Gutowski

The Department of Justice (DOJ) just moved to soften federal regulation of marijuana use, but maintained its position that it can still bar at least certain users from owning guns.

On Thursday, the DOJ issued a final order moving marijuana down the schedule list and opening up more lawful uses of the drug. At the same time, however, Solicitor General John Sauer told the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) that the move doesn’t change the Trump Administration’s position in its pending case against a man who admitted regularly using marijuana while owning a gun.

“In the government’s view, the final order does not affect the proper resolution of this case,” Sauer said in a letter to the High Court about US v. Hemani.

Click here to read more.

Maryland Gun Dealer to Pay Baltimore $2 Million in ‘Ghost Gun’ Settlement
By Jake Fogleman

Gun-control advocates have notched a legal victory in a lawsuit against sellers of so-called ghost guns.

Baltimore officials announced on Monday that the city has reached a $2 million settlement with a Maryland-based firearms dealer accused of helping to fuel the city’s violent crime problem by selling unfinished firearm parts and kits, which opponents label “ghost guns” because they lack traceable serial numbers. Under the settlement, Hanover Armory agreed not to sell any unserialized gun kits, mechanical conversion devices like “Glock switches,” bump stocks, or forced reset triggers. The company also agreed to regularly share purchasing data with the city moving forward.

“This case sends a clear message: we will not tolerate irresponsible gun dealers putting illegal weapons on our streets and enabling cycles of violence in our communities,” Baltimore Mayor Brandon Scott (D.) said in a press release. “A small number of gun dealers sell the majority of guns used in violent crimes, and our work to stem the flow of illegal guns into our city is focused on these reckless dealers. This settlement delivers accountability and oversight, ensuring that any business Hanover Armory does must be within the bounds of the law.”

Click here to continue reading.

Podcast: Virginia Governor Wants Big Gun Bill Expansions (Ft. VCDL’s Philip Van Cleave)
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, we’re doing a deep dive into the gun bills that have reached the final phase of the Virginia legislative process.

That process is pretty unique, with Governor Abigail Spanberger (D.) having a rare ability to change bills after they’ve already passed. To break down how that process works and what Spanberger is trying to accomplish, we have Virginia Citizens Defense League (VCDL) President Philip Van Cleave back on the show.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss everything going on in Virginia and a new ruling out of the Second Circuit Court of Appeals upholding New York’s ban on stun guns and tasers.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: Total Non-Resident Carry Bans are Gone. What Comes Next? [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman

It is now a legal possibility for a gun owner to concealed carry in all 50 states. Gun-rights advocates have more work to do before that becomes a practical reality for most people, though.

As we’ve previously noted, one of the most consistent bright spots for gun-rights litigants since the Supreme Court’s 2022 New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen decision has been in challenges to state-level non-resident gun-carry bans. In just the last two years, a series of lawsuits against California, Louisiana, and New York each resulted in settlement agreements or legislative responses creating new non-resident permitting options. As we pointed out, this left Hawaii as the sole remaining state without any reciprocity agreement or non-resident permit option for out-of-state visitors seeking to exercise their Second Amendment rights. We predicted Hawaii’s law was unlikely to remain legally tenable for much longer.

Now that prediction has panned out.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

DOJ Reverses Course on Defending Biden’s ‘Engaged in the Business’ Rule for Gun Sales | Bearing Arms | By Cam Edwards

FISA Section 702: What the Second Amendment Community Should Know | Cato Institute | By Patrick G. Eddington

Florida Officials Say ChatGPT May Have Advised Gunman in School Shooting | New York Times | By Patricia Mazzei

After Pirro’s Urging, D.C. Court of Appeals Grants Review of Decision Striking Down Magazine Ban | Bearing Arms | By Cam Edwards

Mass shooting reignites push to loosen gun laws in war-torn Ukraine | Reuters | By Yuliia Dysa

Hawaii sees jump in firearm permit applications as denials stay low | Spectrum News | By Staff

Connecticut House passes ban on ‘convertible pistols’ | CT Mirror | By Emilia Otte

SCOTUS to reconsider power of federal sentencing advice in magazine case | Courthouse News Service | By Megan Butler

11th Circuit shoots down challenge to machine gun ban | Courthouse News Service | By Alex Pickett

Inside the Nasty Fight Between Two of the World’s Most Storied Gun Makers | Wall Street Journal | By Alistair MacDonald and Hanna Krueger

In Article About Horrific Shooting That Killed Eight Children, Forbes Lets Readers Place Bets About Gun Control | Futurism | By Maggie Harrison Dupré

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload

As I explore for Reload Members, she sent almost half of those bills back with recommendations for changes that cut in either direction. But the most substantial changes came in her effort to expand the sales and carry bans for “assault firearms” and magazines that hold more than 15 rounds. That was followed closely by her recommendation to eliminate some key exemptions to the hospital gun ban.

Outside of Virginia, we saw a stun gun ban survive Second Amendment scrutiny for the first time in a long time. As Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman explains, the Second Circuit upheld New York’s stun gun ban after it ruled the plaintiffs didn’t prove the weapons were in common use.

Plus, the Second Amendment Foundation’s Kostas Moros joins the podcast to evaluate how the Trump DOJ has performed with gun litigation. I detail the latest swings in the DOJ’s approach for members, too. And we have a bunch of other stories down in the links, including an update on the drama at the NRA Foundation.

Virginia Governor Sends ‘Assault Firearms’ Ban Back to Legislature, Demands Expansion
By Stephen Gutowski

Abigail Spanberger (D.) wants her party to broaden its pending sales and carry ban to include many more firearms.

On Monday, the Virginia Governor sent dozens of bills back to the Democratically-controlled state house with recommendations for changes. Among those were SB749 and HB217, which ban the sale of “assault firearms” and ammunition magazines that can hold more than 15 rounds. Governor Spanberger’s recommended change would substantially expand the definition of “assault firearm.”

The governor’s most substantial edit changes one of the proposed definitions from “a semi-automatic center-fire rifle or pistol with a fixed magazine capacity in excess of 15 rounds” to just one “with a magazine capacity in excess of 15 rounds.” Governor Spanberger did not respond to a request for comment clarifying the intent of the change, but it would appear to extend the definition to capture most firearms whenever they are equipped with such a magazine.

Click here to continue reading.

Spanberger Requests Stricter Hospital Gun Ban from Virginia Legislature
By Shiv Parihar

Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger (D.) has returned a bill banning gun-carry in certain hospitals to the legislature after deciding it didn’t go far enough.

On Monday, Governor Spanberger sent HB229 back to the Virginia statehouse with a recommended change. She wants to remove an exemption that allowed those with written permission from administrators at medical facilities that provide mental health services to continue carrying guns under the proposal. By stripping the written-authorization exception, the Governor’s substitute appears to prohibit hospitals from permitting employees, or even security guards, to carry on their grounds.

“I support the Second Amendment. But gun violence is the leading cause of death for children and teenagers in America, and that should motivate all of us to ask ourselves what we can do to mitigate this harm,” Spanberger said in a statement.

Click here to read the rest.

Analysis: Who are Virginia Governor Spanberger’s Gun Moves Meant to Please? [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski

Governor Abigail Spanberger (D.) has sent about half of the gun bills passed by the Virginia legislature back with changes that sent a conflicting message.

On Monday, Spanberger sent nine gun-control proposals back to the statehouse. Some changes are little more than inconsequential language tweaks. The recommendations that move the needle end up moving it in different directions.

That’s true even in the most substantial gun bill she sent back: the “assault firearms” ban.

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read more. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access!

Federal Appeals Court Upholds New York City Stun Gun Ban
By Jake Fogleman

New Yorkers interested in owning less-lethal electronic weapons for self-defense are out of luck due to a new federal appeals court decision.

A three-judge panel for the Second Circuit Court of Appeals on Monday unanimously sided with a lower court judge in upholding a New York state ban, and a separate New York City ban, on the sale and possession of stun guns and tasers. The panel determined that the plaintiffs failed to show the tools are popular enough to be protected by the Second Amendment.

“Therefore, because Plaintiffs failed to provide evidence that stun guns and tasers are in common use for lawful purposes, they have failed in this case to carry their burden at step one of the Bruen analysis, and summary judgment in favor of Defendants was appropriate,” the panel wrote in an unsigned summary order in Calce v. City of New York.

Click here to read more.

Podcast: How Jeanine Pirro’s Latest Move Risks DOJ’s Reputation With Gun-Rights Activists (Ft. Kostas Moros)
By Stephen Gutowski

This week, we’re looking at how the Department of Justice (DOJ) has performed on gun policy during the second Trump Administration and why Jeanine Pirro’s newest legal filing could change the review.

To examine the DOJ’s track record, we have the Second Amendment Foundation’s Kostas Moros on the show. He has been willing to defend the administration’s overall approach to gun policy and to criticize moves he believes are likely to produce significant setbacks. He argued that the DOJ has actually been as pro-gun as any in modern history.

You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.

Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I cover the First Circuit holding that waiting periods for gun sales do not even implicate the Second Amendment. We also discuss a New York federal judge’s recent decision to toss a lawsuit filed by a licensed concealed carrier who was wrongfully arrested by NYPD officers who were unfamiliar with the city’s gun laws.

Audio here. Video here.

Analysis: DOJ’s Gun Schizophrenia Intensifies [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowsksi

The Department of Justice (DOJ) finds itself in hot water with some gun-rights activists at another moment it could have instead enjoyed unbridled praise.

On Friday, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon sent a letter to Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger (D.) warning her against signing the “assault firearms” ban that passed the legislature last month lest she face a DOJ lawsuit.

“This letter provides formal notice that the Civil Rights Division will commence litigation in the event the Commonwealth of Virginia enacts certain bills that unconstitutionally limit law-abiding Americans’ individual right to bear arms,” Dhillon wrote. “Specifically, SB 749, as written, would require Virginia law enforcement agencies to engage in a practice of unconstitutionally restricting the making, buying, or selling of AR- 15s and many other semi-automatic firearms in common use.”

If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!

Outside The Reload

Ninth Circuit Orders Rehearing of California Open-Carry Gun Case | Bloomberg Law | By Maia Spoto

One year after banning sales, Rhode Island lawmakers consider AR-15 confiscation measure | Rhode Island Current | By Christopher Shea

Kentucky lawmakers override veto on lower age for concealed carry | WLKY | By Norman Seawright

Lawmakers want to restrict 3D printing to stop ghost guns. Critics say it won’t work | Fast Company | By Chris Stokel Walker

NRA Foundation Triples Down on Not Being Transparent | Bearing Arms | By John Petrolino

‘Post-Modern’ Judging and Guns | Duke Center for Firearms Law | By Andrew Willinger

That’s it for this week in guns.

If you want to hear expert analysis of these stories and more, make sure you grab a Reload membership to get our exclusive analysis newsletter every Sunday!

I’ll see you all next week.

Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload