Tag: gun control

DOJ Opens New Front in Second Amendment Fight Against California

It’s a pretty grand time to be a Second Amendment advocate. The right to keep and bear arms has been boosted by several recent court decisions, key among them being New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, which changed the landscape of legal matters concerning the Second Amendment for good.

As a result of Bruen, several anti-gun laws and proposed laws have been, one might say, shot down. Now, in the latest, Harmeet Dhillon, United States Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, has announced a new lawsuit by the Justice Department (DOJ) challenging California’s Glock ban and handgun roster law.

The official press release, found here, states in part:

“The Civil Rights Division will defend law-abiding citizens from states that seek to disarm them illegally,” said Assistant Attorney General Harmeet K. Dhillon of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “This lawsuit is yet another example of this Justice Department enforcing the Second Amendment by protecting citizens against unconstitutional state regulation of firearms.”

California’s new law would ban the retail purchase of common handguns manufactured by Glock and guns with similar firing mechanisms. The state’s existing “Handgun Roster” further limits the types of handguns citizens can lawfully purchase in California. The United States Supreme Court recently reaffirmed that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right to carry handguns outside the home for self-defense in Wolford v. Lopez. The Court reiterated that states cannot prevent citizens from using commonly used firearms for self-defense.

Yes, the right to keep and bear arms properly falls to the Civil Rights Division. People on the left, most of whom lack even a nodding acquaintance with the Bill of Rights, don’t get that, but the right to keep and bear arms, acknowledged (not granted) by the Second Amendment, is a fundamental civil right.

Keep reading

Supreme Court Grants Cert In Grant v. Higgins: A Major Challenge To Connecticut’s Assault Weapon Ban

In a significant development for gun rights advocates, the U.S. Supreme Court on June 30, 2026, granted certiorari in Grant v. Higgins, a challenge to Connecticut’s post-Sandy Hook assault weapon ban. The Court consolidated the case with the parallel Illinois case Viramontes v. Cook County.

The justices will now directly address whether the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right of law-abiding Americans to possess AR-15 platform rifles and other commonly owned semiautomatic firearms.

This is the breakthrough Second Amendment advocates have long awaited. Connecticut’s “assault weapons” ban — and similar laws nationwide — represent a direct challenge to the core right to keep and bear arms “in common use” for lawful purposes.

Grant v. Higgins (originally filed as Grant v. Rovella/Lamont) is brought by the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF), the Connecticut Citizens Defense League (CCDL), and individual plaintiffs including Eddie Grant Jr. It challenges Connecticut’s ban on semiautomatic rifles, which prohibits firearms by specific name and by a list of arbitrary “features” such as pistol grips, folding stocks, and flash suppressors.

The lower courts, including the Second Circuit, upheld the ban. Petitioners argue this ruling defies Supreme Court precedent by treating the most popular rifle in America — the AR-15 platform — as somehow outside constitutional protection. The question presented is clear: Whether the Second and Fourteenth Amendments guarantee the right to possess semiautomatic rifles that are in common use for lawful purposes, including the AR-15.

Keep reading

In the Nick of Time: NRA Secures Injunction Against Virginia ‘Assault Weapons’ and Magazine Ban

On Monday, the NRA secured a preliminary injunction against enforcement of Virginia’s “assault weapons” and 15-plus rounds magazine ban.

The case, Santolla v. Katz, was heard by Judge Jeffrey Campbell, a former Republican member of Virginia’s House of Delegates.

The NRA announced the filing of the lawsuit on May 14, 2026, noting that plaintiffs included the Virginia Shooting Sports Association (VSSA), Middletown Firearms, Middletown Training, Virginia Pride Ltd., and VSSA members Joseph Santolla, and Reagan Adams.

Virginia Scope reporter Brandon Jarvis published Campbell’s ruling, wherein he wrote, “…the Motion for Preliminary Injunction enjoining the Defendants from enforcing the subject Firearms Ban and Magazine Bans as contemplated by the recently enacted Senate Bill 749 and House Bill 217 is GRANTED.”

Judge Campbell noted, “This injunction shall remain in effect until further Order of this Court or no later than July 1, 2027, consistent with the Governor’s recently passed budget amendment, and this matter is continued on the docket of this Court for any additional proceedings as the parties may so advise.”

The “assault weapons” and 15-plus rounds magazine ban was set to take effect July 1, 2026.

Keep reading

Justices Barrett, Gorsuch, Thomas: Public Opinion Can’t Block Constitutional Gun Rights

In a concurring opinion to the Supreme Court’s (SCOTUS) Wolford decision, Justices Amy Coney Barrett, Neil Gorsuch, and Clarence Thomas noted public opinion cannot block the exercise of a constitutional right.

Breitbart News reported that SCOTUS ruled 6-3 against a Hawaii gun control in Wolford, finding the limitations against licensed concealed carry on private property violated the 2nd and 14th Amendments.

Justices Barrett, Gorsuch, and Thomas used a concurring opinion to note that “The Second Amendment secures the pre-existing right of the people to have and carry weapons for their defense.”

They opined that “States may regulate the keeping and bearing of arms so long as they do not ‘infring[e]’ the right, as originally understood.”

The justices went on to explain that a state must be able to prove a given law’s constitutionality by passing Bruen’s (2022) two-step test.

Justices Barrett, Gorsuch, and Thomas then tested Hawaii’s law and found the major reason for its adoption and enforcement was that it served to reflect the majority of the Hawaiian people’s disdain for the public carrying of firearms. But such a basis is not sufficient, as the three concurring justices indicated: “While most Hawaiians might prefer that no one carry firearms in public places, a majority’s opposition to a constitutional right is not a permissible basis for restricting it. After all, ‘[t]he very purpose of a Bill of Rights was to withdraw certain subjects from the vicissitudes of political controversy” and “to place them beyond the reach of majorities and officials.’”

Keep reading

12 Sheriffs, 17 Prosecutors Who Will Not Enforce Virginia AR-15 Ban

The number of sheriffs and commonwealth attorneys who are taking a stand against the Democrats’ AR-15 has grown so that now 12 sheriffs and 17 prosecutors have made clear they will not enforce it.

On May 25, 2026, Breitbart News reported that Spotsylvania commonwealth attorney Ryan Mehaffey had made clear he would not enforce the ban. Days later, Breitbart News pointed to a WAVY 10 article which observed that the number of prosecutors refusing to enforce the ban was continuing to grow.

On May 30, 2026, Breitbart News noted that Clarke County Sheriff Travis Sumption making clear his office would not enforce the state’s “assault weapons” ban nor the “expanded public-carry restrictions.”

Now, Virginia Citizens Defense League president Philip Van Cleave has released a list showing the number of prosecutors refusing to enforce the ban has reached 17 and the number of sheriffs is at 12.

Here are the prosecutors who are taking a stand for Virginians’ gun rights:

  • W. Lyle Carver, Amherst County
  • Leslie M. Fleet, Appomattox County
  • Paul A. McAndrews, Campbell County
  • Daniel J. Farnsworth Jr., Charlotte County
  • Matthew E. Bass, Clarke County
  • W. Eric Branscom, Floyd County
  • John L. Lumpkins Jr., Goochland County
  • Bethany Harrison, Lynchburg
  • Chapman L. Good, Sr., Page County
  • Dayna K. Bobbitt, Patrick County
  • Rob Cerullo, Powhatan County
  • Justin L. Griffith, Pulaski County
  • Kyle Kilgore, Scott County
  • Elizabeth H. Cooper, Shenandoah County
  • Phillip Blevins, Smyth County
  • Ryan Mehaffey, Spotsylvania County
  • John S. Bell, Warren County

Here are the 12 sheriffs: Appomattox County Sheriff, Robert N. Richardson, Clarke County Sheriff, Travis M. Sumption, Floyd County Sheriff, Brian Craig, Hanover County Sheriff, Gregory W. Six, Henry County, Sheriff Wayne Davis, Louisa County Sheriff, Donald Lowe, Patrick County, Sheriff Daniel M. Smith, Powhatan County Sheriff, Brad W. Nunnally Jr., Scott County Sheriff, Jeff B. Edds, Shenandoah County Sheriff, Timothy C. Carter, Spotsylvania County Sheriff, Roger L. Harris, and Warren County Sheriff, Crystal M. Cline.

The ban on AR-15s and similar rifles, along with magazines holding more than 15 rounds, is set to take effect July 1, 2026.

Keep reading

When Reality Bites: Gavin Newsom Has No Clue on Concealed Carry

Hardly a week goes by without some lefty public official saying something on a major issue that is so far from the real-world facts Americans deal with every day that it leaves you wondering how anybody could be so removed from realty.

Today’s Exhibit A is California Gov. Gavin Newsom, the would-be 2028 Democratic presidential nominee despite the fact that under his long-running administration the Golden State has compiled a soaring poverty rate, confiscatory tax rates, and hundreds of thousands of taxpayers fleeing to Texas, Florida, Arizona and other free states.

Even so, Newsom is rarely bashful about delivering some nescient pronouncement on current issues and personalities and, as Just Facts Daily points out, the Supreme Court’s Wolford v. Lopez decision striking down Hawaii’s anti-conceal-carry law proved irresistible to the former San Fransisco mayor:

“Gun laws keep people safe. This ruling by Trump’s Supreme Court will only endanger people. If Justice Alito really thinks people need guns to go to the grocery store ‘for self-defense,’ this country is truly broken,” Newsom declared in a tweet.

One wonders how many years it’s been since Newsom personally entered and shopped in a neighborhood grocery store. And it appears Newsom wasn’t terribly familiar with the specifics of the Hawaii law struck down by the court as a violation of the right to keep and bear arms for individual self-defense.

Four years ago, the High Court held in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen  that both the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution guarantee the individual right to be armed for self-defense purposes.

To get around that decision, Hawaii revised its law to make carrying illegal in a lengthy list of specific public places, including grocery stores. In response, the Court’s opinion, written by Justice Samuel Alito, observed that:

“This law departs sharply from the standard common-law rule on access to private property held open to the public. Under that rule, everyone, including those lawfully carrying firearms, may enter unless expressly prohibited from doing so.

“By contrast, under the new Hawaii law, no one carrying a firearm may enter without the property owner’s express authorization. The effect of this new rule is to impose severe restrictions on the daily activities of residents who have satisfied the State’s rigorous requirements for the issuance of a carry permit. 

“When these permit holders leave home in the morning, not only must they take care to avoid all the territory where the possession of a gun is prohibited outright, but they may also be barred from entering many places that people routinely visit in the course of their daily routines, such as gas stations, convenience stores, restaurants, coffee shops, drug stores, grocery stores, ‘big box’ stores, home improvement stores, barber shops or hair salons, dry cleaners, and laundromats”

Therefore, the Court held the revised Hawaii statute “violates the constitutional right to keep and bear arms” because it imposes “severe restrictions on the daily activities of residents who have satisfied the State’s rigorous requirements for the issuance of a carry permit.”

Keep reading

Justice Jackson Hit With a Major Constitutional Lesson Following Her Dissent in Hawaii Gun Rights Case – State Relied on an Old ‘Black Code’ Law to Disarm Residents

Gun rights experts are schooling Far-left Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson following her stupid dissent in a key gun rights case earlier this week.

As TGP’s Jordan Conradson reported, the Supreme Court sided with three Hawaii residents on Thursday, overturning a law that barred concealed-carry permit holders from exercising their rights in public.

All three liberal justices, Elena Kagan, Sonia Sotomayor, and Jackson, dissented in the 6-3 ruling.

To defend disarming its residents, Hawaii relied in part on a blatantly racist 1865 Louisiana statute enacted as part of the post-Civil War Black Codes. This made it illegal to carry firearms onto another person’s property without the owner’s consent.

Of course, this was due to the fact that Louisiana, which was ruled at the time by racist white Democrats, feared an armed black populace.

“It is disgraceful that any state would rely on a law specifically aimed at taking away the Second Amendment rights or any constitutional right of Black Americans as it was at that time,” attorney Kevin O’Grady, who represented the plaintiffs, told Fox News.

Jackson, however, had a different take. Jackson claimed in her dissent that the Court ignored what she considered an important constitutional question.

Keep reading

Supreme Court calls out state for violating TWO constitutional amendments with one law

The Supreme Court has called out the state of Hawaii, after an earlier law that essentially made it impossible to get a license to carry a firearm was struck down, for replacing it with a similar demand that accomplished essentially the same thing.

That law, too, now has been banished.

The court ruled 6-3 that Hawaii’s newest gun ban was unconstitutional under the Second and 14th Amendments.

The majority opinion was a major win for gun rights activists as it threw out Hawaii’s insistence that it could require gun owners to get “permission” to carry firearms on any private property that is open to the public in the state.

The opinion pointed out that “For years, the State of Hawaii made it almost impossible to obtain a license to carry a firearm. Four years ago, however, this Court held in New York State Rifle & Pistol Assn., Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U. S. 1, that the Second and Fourteenth Amendments protect the right to carry hand guns outside the home for self-defense.

“Hawaii responded by replacing its old law on carry permits with new laws that achieved a similar result,” the court said.

The fight this time is over the state’s “law that prohibits firearms on private property open to the public without the express and affirmative consent of the property owner.”

The court found the law a burden.

“When these permit holders leave home, not only must they take care to avoid all the territory where the possession of a gun is prohibited outright, but they may also be barred from entering many places that people routinely visit in the course of their daily routines, such as gas stations, restaurants, and stores.”

The ruling said Hawaii officials were flipping the default rule at common law, “under which anyone has an implied license to enter property held open to the public unless the property owner withdraws consent.”

The opinion cited both the earlier Heller and McDonald rulings, which struck down gun limits imposed by extremists.

Keep reading

Trump DOJ to California: Drop the Glock Ban or Get Sued

Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights Harmeet Dhillon advised Gov. Gavin Newsom (D-CA) and California AG Rob Bonta on Wednesday to drop their Glock ban or face a lawsuit.

Dhillon posted to X: “Today, I notified Newsom and Bonta to drop the unconstitutional restrictions on law-abiding citizens’ rights to purchase legal firearms before the ban goes into effect, or we will sue. Stay tuned!”

Breitbart News reported that Newsom signed California’s Glock ban into law on October 10, 2025. It is set to take effect on July 1, 2026.

The ban was sponsored by Democrat lawmakers and fashioned as a response to the use of “Glock switches,” which are already illegal. “Glock switches” are federally prohibited plastic pieces that can be affixed to the rear of a Glock slide to make the pistol shoot full auto.

Such switches are wildly popular with gangs and street criminals — therefore California Democrats are banning new sales of one of the most popular handguns ever made, the Glock pistol.

On May 12, 2025, Breitbart News pointed to the language of the Glock ban legislation, noting that Democrats secured passage of the ban by labeling Glocks as “machinegun-convertible pistol[s].”

Newsom and Bonta are now on notice that the DOJ will take action if they allow the ban to go into effect.

Keep reading

Resurfaced Video Shows Democrat PA Congressional Candidate Dreams of Disarming Citizens and Police

Democrat Scranton, PA, Mayor Paige Cognetti is hoping to flip a red congressional seat blue by unseating Rep. Rob Bresnahan (R-PA). But a resurfaced video from 2020 exposes a gun-grabbing posture that some voters may not be aware of.

In the video, taken from a virtual town hall, Cognetti supports disarming police and emulating Japan’s gun-control laws to take away guns from citizens.

Japan has some of the strictest gun control laws in the developed world.

The Firearms and Swords Control Law 1958 states that no one shall possess a firearm except under narrow, strictly regulated exceptions. Handguns are banned with almost no exceptions for ordinary citizens.

Cognetti told the town hall audience, “I would love to get to a world where a country where we don’t have or police don’t have firearms and where we don’t have firearms that citizens aren’t carrying them either.”

“I’ve lived in Japan for a couple years. There are no guns there and it’s lovely.”

She continued, “We don’t have to worry about some of these things because there are no guns there. That would be something that would be a great reality for us to live in.”

Cognetti repeated her fantasy during an interview with the Black Scranton Project, saying, “I do want to get to a point where we don’t have to worry about any officers having holsters or guns in them.”

“That is ideally where we get in our whole country.”

National Republican Congressional Committee spokeswoman Reilly Richardson told the Daily Caller News Foundation, “Political opportunist Paige Cognetti wants to rip firearms away from law-abiding citizens while simultaneously making life easier for criminals.”

“Pennsylvanians know Cognetti will go to great lengths to strip them of their constitutional rights.”

Keep reading