Skip to content

October 2026

  • in FPC

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."

  • in NRA

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.

  • in GOA

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.

  • in NRA

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.

  • in FPC

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.

  • in NRA

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.

  • in FPC

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.

  • in GOA

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.

  • in ATF

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.