An Update on Challenges to State Assault Weapon and Magazine Bans
In November 2024, Andrew Willinger published a summary of ongoing Second Amendment litigation challenging state restrictions on large-capacity magazines and certain semiautomatic rifles often referred to as “assault weapons.” Although the Supreme Court recently denied cert in two such cases—Snope v. Brown (formerly Bianchi v. Brown) and Ocean State Tactical v. Rhode Island—some of the Justices signaled that they are closely monitoring lower-court developments in the area and potentially planning to hear a case “in the next Term or two.” In light of these developments, this post provides an update on the status of these cases.
Ten states and the District of Columbia currently ban assault weapons in some form, while fourteen states and the District of Columbia restrict the possession of large-capacity magazines. All of these laws have been challenged in court by gun-rights groups. Snope is a Second Amendment challenge to Maryland’s 2013 ban on AR-15s and certain other semiautomatic rifles, which was upheld by the en banc Fourth Circuit in August 2024. In an statement respecting the denial of certiorari,[1] Justice Kavanaugh called into question the Fourth Circuit’s decision. However, he also emphasized the value of continued lower court “percolation”, citing five assault weapon cases currently on appeal in different circuits, and suggested that the Court should address the issue “in the next Term or two.” For more analysis of Kavanaugh’s statement in Snope, see this prior post.
Ocean State Tactical involves Rhode Island’s ban on large capacity magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds, which the First Circuit upheld in March 2024. Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch would have granted cert in Ocean State, though none of them wrote separately to explain their reasoning.
Below is an update on the major ongoing cases. The update focuses on the headline legal challenge or challenges to each state law and may not capture all litigation.
Looking forward, three major developments to watch are:
- The Third Circuit has scheduled oral argument in Association of N.J. Rifle & Pistol Clubs v. Platkin, a Second Amendment challenge to New Jersey’s assault weapon and large-capacity magazine bans, for July 1. The panel includes Judge Shwartz (an Obama appointee), Judge Freeman (a Biden appointee), and Senior Judge Smith (a George W. Bush appointee).
- After a round of supplemental briefing in April to address the impact of its decision in Duncan upholding California’s large-capacity magazine ban, the Ninth Circuit has resubmitted Miller v. Bonta—which involves California’s assault weapons ban—for decision (seemingly without an additional oral argument).
- The Second Circuit heard oral argument in NAGR v. Lamont (a challenge to Connecticut’s assault weapon and LCM bans) in October 2024, more than eight months ago, and received supplemental briefs from the parties in November. Absent a direct en banc rehearing, the panel’s decision should be issued shortly.
Depending on outcome, these cases could well push the Court to take up the assault weapon issue as soon as next Term.
|
State |
Law challenged |
Circuit |
Case Caption |
Status |
Factfinding? |
|
California |
LCM ban (more than 10 rounds); enacted in 2010 |
9th Cir. |
Duncan v. Bonta (23-55805) (Below: 17-cv-1017; S.D. Cal.) |
· District court granted PI and struck down the law in October 2023
· Argued before the en banc court in March 2024
· En banc court upheld the law in March 2025
· Deadline for plaintiffs to petition for certiorari extended to July 18, 2025
|
· Summary judgment granted to plaintiffs pre-Bruen; decision ultimately reversed on appeal
· Currently in preliminary injunction posture
· State submitted multiple expert declarations |
|
AW ban; enacted in 2010 |
9th Cir. |
Miller v. Bonta (23-2979) (Below: 19-cv-01537; S.D. Cal.) |
· Held in abeyance pending decision in Duncan
· Ninth Circuit ordered supplemental briefing in March 2025 after Duncan en banc decision; briefs filed in April 2025
· After supplemental briefing, case will be resubmitted
|
· Initial district court proceedings were pre-Bruen; state submitted multiple expert declarations
· Ninth Circuit vacated district court’s judgment and remanded for further proceedings consistent with Bruen
· On remand, district court ordered historical surveys |
|
|
Colorado |
LCM ban (more than 15 rounds); enacted in 2013 |
10th Cir. |
Gates v. Polis (24-1209) (Below: 24-cv-00001; D. Col.) |
· Case withdrawn by plaintiffs
· Reporting suggests this was a result of issues and rulings regarding the plaintiffs’ common-use evidence
|
No |
|
Connecticut |
AW and LCM ban (more than 10 rounds); enacted in 2013 |
2d Cir. |
NAGR v. Lamont (23-1162) (Below: 22-cv-1118; D. Conn.) |
· District court denied PI in August 2024
· Panel heard oral argument on October 16, 2024
|
No, decided on preliminary injunction |
|
Delaware |
AW and LCM ban (more than 17 rounds); enacted in 2022 |
3d Cir. |
Gray v. Jennings (24-309) (Below: 23-1633, 23-1634, 23-1641; 3d Cir.) (Below: 22-cv-00951, 22-cv-01500, 23-cv-00033; D. Del.) consolidated with Graham v. Jennings and Delaware State Sportsmen’s Association, Inc. v. Delaware Department of Safety & Homeland Security |
· Third Circuit affirmed denial of PI on procedural grounds in July 2024
· Cert denied in January 2025
· As of February 2025, further proceedings being held in abeyance pending Third Circuit’s decision in Association of N.J. Rifle & Pistol Clubs v. Platkin |
No, decided on preliminary injunction |
|
Illinois |
IL State AW and LCM ban (more than 10 rounds); enacted in 2023 |
7th Cir. |
NAGR v. Naperville (23-1353) (Below: 22-cv-04775, N.D. Ill.) formerly Bevis v. Naperville |
· Seventh Circuit panel upheld the law in November 2023
· Cert denied in July 2024
· Proceedings stayed pending decision in Barnett
|
· No fact-finding in initial proceedings pre-Bruen
· Before proceedings were stayed pending decision in Barnett, fact-finding was set to take place throughout spring and summer 2025 |
|
Cook County AW ban; enacted in 2006 |
7th Cir. |
Viramontes v. County of Cook (24-1437) (Below: 21-cv-4595; N.D. Ill.) |
· District court sided with defendant on SJ in March 2024
· Seventh Circuit affirmed district court in June 2025 |
· Pre-Bruen, plaintiffs requested judgment in defendants’ favor before factual development, which the defendants requested be denied
· Bruen was decided during discovery; Cook County submitted several expert witnesses
|
|
|
IL State AW ban, enacted in 2023 |
7th Cir. |
Barnett v. Raoul (23-01825) (Below: 23-cv-00209; S.D. Ill.) |
· District court granted preliminary injunction in April 2023
· Seventh Circuit vacated district court’s order granting preliminary injunction in November 2023
· Cert petition denied in July 2024
· District court issued a permanent injunction in December 2024
· Seventh Circuit ordered briefing in April 2025, which is set to conclude by late June
|
· Plaintiffs and defendants each submitted multiple expert declarations
· Bench trial held |
|
|
Maryland |
AW ban; enacted in 2013 |
4th Cir. |
Snope v. Brown (21-1255) (Below: 20-cv-03495; D. Md.) formerly Bianchi v. Brown |
· En banc Fourth Circuit upheld the law in August 2024
· Cert petition denied in June 2025 |
Arguably yes, litigation has been ongoing since 2013 including summary judgment briefing |
|
Massachusetts |
AW and LCM ban (more than 10 rounds) |
1st Cir. |
Capen v. Campbell (24-1061) (Below: 22-cv-11431; D. Mass.) |
· District court denied PI in December 2023
· Panel heard oral argument on October 7, 2024
· First Circuit upheld denial of PI in April 2025
|
No, decided on preliminary injunction |
|
New Jersey |
LCM and AW ban (more than 10 rounds); AW ban enacted in 1990, LCM ban amended most recently in 2018 |
3d Cir. |
Association of N.J. Rifle & Pistol Clubs v. Platkin (24-2506) (Below: 18-cv-10507, 22-cv-04397, 22-cv-04360; D.N.J.) |
· District court granted PI in part in July 2024
· Cross-appeals filed with the Third Circuit
· Oral argument scheduled for July 1, 2025 |
No, decided on preliminary injunction |
|
New York |
AW ban; originally enacted in 1994 and amended in 2013 |
2d Cir. |
Lane v. James (22-cv-10989; S.D.N.Y.)
|
· District court declined to impose a stay pending the Second Circuit decision in Lamont and denied the state’s motion to dismiss in January 2024
· Cross motions for SJ denied in March 2025
· Proceedings stayed in April 2025 pending Snope cert petition and Second Circuit’s decision in NAGR v. Lamont
|
Yes, once summary judgment decision is issued |
|
Oregon |
LCM ban (more than 10 rounds); enacted in 2022 by ballot initiative |
9th Cir. |
Oregon Firearms Federation v. Brown (23-35540) (Below: 22-cv-01815; D. Or.) |
· District court denied PI and later denied MSJ in May 2023
· Proceedings stayed pending decision in Duncan
|
Bench trial held |
|
Rhode Island |
LCM ban (more than 10 rounds); enacted in 2022 |
1st Cir. |
Ocean State Tactical v. Rhode Island (23-1072) (Below: 22-cv-00246; D.R.I.) |
· First Circuit panel upheld the law in March 2024
· Cert petition denied in June 2025
|
No, decided on preliminary injunction |
|
Vermont |
LCM ban (more than 10 rounds for a long gun and more than 15 rounds for a handgun); enacted in 2018 |
2d Cir. |
Vermont Federation of Sportsmen’s Clubs v. Birmingham (24-2026) (Below: 23-cv-00710; D. Vt.) |
· District court denied PI in July 2024
· Appeal docketed but stayed pending decision in NAGR v. Lamont |
No, decided on preliminary injunction |
|
Washington |
AW ban; enacted in 2023 |
9th Cir. |
Hartford v. Brown (23-cv-05364; W.D. Wash.) formerly Hartford v. Ferguson |
· Case still at district court level
· Proceedings stayed pending decision in Duncan
· District court ordered a status report to be filed two weeks after decision in Miller or by July 11, 2025
|
· State submitted multiple expert declarations |
|
Washington, D.C. |
LCM ban (more than 10 rounds); enacted in 2008 |
D.C. Cir. |
Hanson v. D.C. (23-7061) (Below: 22-cv-02256; D.D.C.)
|
· D.C. Circuit panel upheld the law in October 2024
· Cert petition denied in June 2025
|
No, decided on preliminary injunction |
[1] Only Justice Thomas noted an official dissent in Snope. However, it is safe to presume that Justices Alito and Gorsuch (both of whom voted to hear the LCM case) also would have taken up Snope now.