Colofornia Dreaming Wiki

Judge Won't Rubber-Stamp End of Florida's Waiting Period

Sun, 01 Nov 2026 08:40:06 +0000

Judge Won't Rubber-Stamp End of Florida's Waiting Period¶

What happened. In Dunn v. Glass, Judge Steven D. Merryday of the Middle District of Florida denied a joint motion asking the court to declare Florida's three-day waiting period unconstitutional. Florida's own defendants had agreed that the law violates the Second Amendment. The judge asked for a fuller presentation and invited the Governor, the Legislature, Brady and Giffords to file amicus briefs. Notices of intent are due November 30, 2026, and briefs are due February 1, 2027.

Why it matters. Even when the State concedes, the courts want a full record, so this fight will run into 2027.

Source: NRA-ILA: "District Court Declines to Enter Agreement to Invalidate Florida's Waiting Period Law in NRA Case and Invites Amici Participation" (October 29, 2026)

FPC and NRA Sue Pennsylvania Over Under-21 Carry Ban

Sun, 01 Nov 2026 08:40:06 +0000

FPC and NRA Sue Pennsylvania Over Under-21 Carry Ban¶

What happened. FPC and the NRA, joined by member Daniel Maines, filed Maines v. Bethel in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Pennsylvania bars adults under 21 from even applying for the license needed to carry concealed, carry in a vehicle, or carry at all in Philadelphia. The suit asks the court to declare that 18-to-20-year-olds have a right to carry outside the home and to block enforcement of the ban. It builds on the Third Circuit's Lara v. Paris holding that 18-to-20-year-olds are among "the people."

Why it matters. The Third Circuit already said in Lara that 18-to-20-year-olds are among "the people." This case tests whether Pennsylvania will honor that for licensed carry.

Source: FPC: "FPC Sues Pennsylvania Again: Second Amendment Rights Don't Start at 21" (October 29, 2026)

Fifth Circuit: Federal Switchblade Ban Violates the Second Amendment

Sun, 01 Nov 2026 08:40:06 +0000

Fifth Circuit: Federal Switchblade Ban Violates the Second Amendment¶

What happened. In Knife Rights, Inc. v. Blanche, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that switchblade knives are "arms" protected by the Second Amendment. It also held that the government failed to justify the Switchblade Act's interstate-commerce restrictions, 15 U.S.C. § 1242. The court reversed the dismissal of that claim and sent it back for further proceedings. It affirmed dismissal of the facial challenge to § 1243, which covers certain federal jurisdictions.

Why it matters. The court said the right to keep arms includes the right to acquire them. That principle reaches well beyond knives.

Source: NRA-ILA: "Fifth Circuit Rules Federal Switchblade Knife Restrictions Violate the Second Amendment" (October 23, 2026)

GOA Sues Over "Enhanced" Background Checks for Under-21 Adults

Sun, 01 Nov 2026 08:40:06 +0000

GOA Sues Over "Enhanced" Background Checks for Under-21 Adults¶

What happened. Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation filed Haward v. Blanche in the Western District of Pennsylvania. The suit challenges the "enhanced" background checks for adults under 21 created by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. GOA argues that 18-to-20-year-olds are part of "the people" and that the checks work as age-based waiting periods. GOA also reports that the Department of Justice has appealed GOA's win against the "Engaged in the Business" rule.

Why it matters. A right that comes with a built-in delay for one age group of adults is being rationed. Courts should explain why 18-year-olds can serve their country but have to wait to defend themselves.

Source: GOA: "THIS WEEK IN THE FIGHT" (October 23, 2026)

Federal Court Strikes Down New York's Body Armor Ban

Sun, 01 Nov 2026 08:40:06 +0000

Federal Court Strikes Down New York's Body Armor Ban¶

What happened. In Heeter v. James, Judge John L. Sinatra, Jr. of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York held that body armor is an "Arm" protected by the Second Amendment. The court granted FPC summary judgment and permanently enjoined New York's restrictions on buying and selling protective armor, finding the State showed no historical tradition supporting the ban. The court gave New York a 14-day stay pending appeal. Laws against using body armor while committing violent crimes are not affected.

Why it matters. Equipment that only protects a life is about as defensive as it gets. A ruling that it falls under the Second Amendment is a sensible reading of the word "arms."

Source: FPC: "FPC Makes History Again: Federal Court Strikes Down New York Body Armor Ban" (October 21, 2026)

NRA sues New Mexico (again) over its 7-day waiting period

Sun, 01 Nov 2026 08:40:06 +0000

NRA sues New Mexico (again) over its 7-day waiting period¶

What happened. The NRA, joined by NSSF, the Second Amendment Foundation, New Mexico gun groups and businesses, and an NRA member, filed NSSF v. Torrez in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico. The Tenth Circuit already held New Mexico's 7-day waiting period unconstitutional in Ortega v. Grisham, except as to people whose background checks don't clear within three days. According to NRA-ILA, the state keeps enforcing the law against everyone except the two Ortega plaintiffs and has threatened criminal enforcement against retailers and buyers. The new suit seeks to stop that.

Why it matters. When a federal appeals court says a law is unconstitutional, the usual next step is to stop enforcing it. New Mexico's reading is that the Constitution only protects people who have already sued. That's a creative theory of rights, and the NRA is asking a court to retire it.

Source: NRA-ILA: "NRA Files (Another) Lawsuit Challenging New Mexico's 7-Day Waiting Period Law" (October 19, 2026)

GOA asks Pennsylvania's AG to clear up the NFA "legal limbo"

Sun, 01 Nov 2026 08:40:06 +0000

GOA asks Pennsylvania's AG to clear up the NFA "legal limbo"¶

What happened. After the Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF ruling and ATF's Open Letter saying it will no longer require registration or approval for short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, silencers and "any other weapons," GOA says Pennsylvania owners and dealers are stuck in "dangerous legal limbo." The worry is Title 18, Section 908 of the state Crimes Code (Prohibited Offensive Weapons), which GOA says could be read to bring first-degree misdemeanor charges. GOA delivered a legal analysis to Attorney General Dave Sunday arguing Section 908 does not cover these items, and asked him to issue a formal opinion and advise the Pennsylvania State Police to match it.

Why it matters. Washington finally stopped demanding a permission slip for a muffler, and now Harrisburg has to decide whether its "offensive weapons" statute says something GOA argues it never said. Gun owners shouldn't have to guess which government is going to arrest them this week.

What you can do. Pennsylvania residents: GOA has an action form on the release page asking AG Sunday to issue written guidance that Section 908 does not criminalize silencers, short-barreled rifles and related items.

Source: Gun Owners of America: "PA: GOA Knocks Down Federal NFA Scheme—Now AG Dave Sunday Must Protect Pennsylvanians" (October 15, 2026)

FPC asks the full D.C. Circuit to let gun owners into court

Sun, 01 Nov 2026 08:40:06 +0000

FPC asks the full D.C. Circuit to let gun owners into court¶

What happened. FPC filed an opening brief and a petition for initial hearing en banc in Wehr-Darroca v. District of Columbia, its challenge to D.C.'s ban on magazines holding more than ten rounds. A district court dismissed the case under D.C. Circuit precedent (Navegar, Seegars and Parker) that requires a heightened showing of a specific threat of prosecution before a gun owner can sue. Under the ban, violators face a felony punishable by up to three years in prison and a $12,500 fine. FPC also argues that its members' cost of buying restricted-capacity replacement magazines gives them standing under the court's recent Angelo v. District of Columbia decision.

Why it matters. FPC says the D.C. Circuit treats Second Amendment cases differently from other constitutional cases. Translation: to challenge a gun ban there, you practically have to volunteer for prosecution first. As FPC President Brandon Combs put it, "The Second Amendment is not a second-class right, and gun owners are not second-class citizens."

Source: Firearms Policy Coalition: "FPC to D.C. Circuit: Gun Owners Shouldn't Have to Risk Prison to Challenge Gun Bans" (October 15, 2026)

ATF stops enforcing NFA paperwork for suppressors, SBRs, SBSs and AOWs

Sun, 01 Nov 2026 08:40:06 +0000

ATF stops enforcing NFA paperwork for suppressors, SBRs, SBSs and AOWs¶

What happened. ATF released an Open Letter and FAQ saying it will not enforce the requirement to apply for and receive approval before making or transferring short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, suppressors and "any other weapons," or the NFA's registration and tax-stamp requirements for those items. It follows the Attorney General's decision not to appeal the Northern District of Texas ruling in Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF, and to apply the guidance to everyone, not just the plaintiffs. The $200 tax and full NFA rules still apply to machine guns and destructive devices. State and local laws still apply, dealers must still run Form 4473s and NICS checks, and moving an SBR or SBS across state lines still needs ATF approval on a Form 20.

Why it matters. Uncle Sam no longer wants a permission slip and a registration card for a muffler. Read the fine print before you celebrate, though: ATF itself says state and local laws still apply, so check yours first.

Source: ATF: "ATF issues guidance on National Firearms Act transfers for short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, suppressors, and certain other firearms" (October 9, 2026)