Legal Trump Administration Lets Key Gun Law Lapse Following Court Ruling

Trump Administration Lets Key Gun Law Lapse Following Court Ruling

https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/13/us/politics/national-firearms-act-gun-control-doj.html

Or

https://archive.is/20260813125059/https://www.nytimes.com/2026/08/13/us/politics/national-firearms-act-gun-control-doj.html

 

[MK6M9]

I was replying to OP, who has well documented severe case of TDS

oh. i apologize

 

[Gawernator]

For your viewing pleasure

Reddit

www.reddit.com

Bwahahahaha, they are seething. Is that your post? I like the top comment "This is going to rustle some jimmies"

 

[No_glonks]

Bwahahahaha, they are seething. Is that your post? I like the top comment "This is going to rustle some jimmies"

Kostas Moros

Kostas Moros (@MorosKostas) on X

Director of Legal Research and Education, @2AFDN. The Second Amendment is my main obsession. Any opinions expressed here are only my own.

x.com

 

[Gawernator]

Kostas Moros

Kostas Moros (@MorosKostas) on X

Director of Legal Research and Education, @2AFDN. The Second Amendment is my main obsession. Any opinions expressed here are only my own.

x.com

The comments in the thread are hilarious. You can see them so angry and trying to deny the facts the attorney stated, it's real cognitive dissonance in real time!

 

[john_marsten_1873]

Kostas Moros

Kostas Moros (@MorosKostas) on X

Director of Legal Research and Education, @2AFDN. The Second Amendment is my main obsession. Any opinions expressed here are only my own.

x.com

I appreciate that @kmoros and 2AFDN are also fighting for California in particular - because it's only seeming to get more difficult for us.

However, when the backlash from economy (including higher costs for ammo and gas), the foreign wars and influence and the corruption come home to roost, don't be surprised if they find a way to expand SCOTUS and start rolling back.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see what pres AOC does:

https://twitter.com/x/status/2080060589154398384

 

[Gawernator]

I appreciate that @kmoros and 2AFDN are also fighting for California in particular - because it's only seeming to get more difficult for us.

However, when the backlash from economy (including higher costs for ammo and gas) and the foreign wars and influence the corruption come home to roost, don't be surprised if they find a way to expand SCOTUS and start rolling back.

I guess we'll just have to wait and see what pres AOC does:

https://twitter.com/x/status/2080060589154398384

Huh, what war? John was silent when we were POUNDING the ground under Obama. Wtf haahahahahah cognitive dissonance

 

[Warpspeed]

Not sure which judge they'll pickup in CDCal but I imagine any PI (if any are issued) gets stayed at Ninth. Then we're off to the SCOTUS waiting room again.

I have a feeling it will take way longer than 52 days, we probably won’t get a ruling from the SC on AWs until late June next year. But there is definitely more reason to be hopeful today than there ever was in the past.

Is 52 days the oral arguments in viramontes?

Or did we finally give up on the "two weeks" line and make it "52 days"?

In ~50 days there will be oral arguments for Viramontes, but they won’t issue a ruling till the end of the term in June. The real curveball would be if they issue a per curium ruling on Duncan/Gators (they won’t but a man can dream)

i am pretty sure that it will be years, probably at least another five -- just like all the other lawsuits and whatnots that go on for forever with nothing to show for any of it

For those who didn't click on the links -

The administration has another 52 days to file an appeal in the case.

 

[Warpspeed]

I'm glad that you all are here keeping me employed - All the CCW non-sense was removed. It is not relevant to this discussion.

The OP was letting us know that the US Gov is not going to waste tax payer dollars challenging a ruling that went against them and in our favor. That's a win.

Now, for CA, it isn't overly important for now as we can't buy SBRs or other Class 3 stuff but it is good to know that part of the NFA is being invalidated and I am sure some smart lawyer will use that ruling to argue for the 2A in some other case. We have had our rights slowly eroded and now we are seeing that same approach to getting them back.

 

[Jcwatchdog]

i am pretty sure that it will be years, probably at least another five -- just like all the other lawsuits and whatnots that go on for forever with nothing to show for any of it

You realize that there has never been an AW case ever taken by the scotus until now? And you realize that until fairly recently, we haven’t had a favorable set of justices to actually strike down an AW ban? And you realize that the bans at issue are copy and pasted from California? And if the scotus strikes the IL/CT bans down, it invalidates them nationwide? So tell me again how you have absolutely no clue about what’s going on other than parroting the tired old trope of “woe is me”. A winner is a winner, and a loser is a loser and a winner who thinks they are a loser, even though they are winning, is a loser.

 

[1911whore]

We in CA won’t see the benefit of this amazing ruling

 

[CadeH]

It applies to AOWs if you are a plaintiff in the SilencerShop part of the case (GOA). It doesnt if you are just a plaintiff in the Jensen part of the case (FPC). There is no CA law that says you cannot turn a pistol into an AOW. AOWs are explicitly legal here under 17710(a).

There is also no law saying you cannot go to AZ and build an AOW from a stripped lower DROSed as an "other" or "rifle" and import it back into the state, so long as you never sell it as a pistol.

 

[treelogger]

Here we have California, the extra constitutional state. They roll their own way because our federal government permits it.

Would now be a good time to tell you about the 10th amendment?

 

[Mfischer]

For those who didn't click on the links -

The administration has another 52 days to file an appeal in the case.

The trump admin has said they won’t be appealing, at least according to a congressional rep

 

[MK6M9]

You realize that there has never been an AW case ever taken by the scotus until now? And you realize that until fairly recently, we haven’t had a favorable set of justices to actually strike down an AW ban? And you realize that the bans at issue are copy and pasted from California? And if the scotus strikes the IL/CT bans down, it invalidates them nationwide? So tell me again how you have absolutely no clue about what’s going on other than parroting the tired old trope of “woe is me”. A winner is a winner, and a loser is a loser and a winner who thinks they are a loser, even though they are winning, is a loser.

go look at 1994. and also you realize that we still cannot buy what you call AW in california and in other states, for that matter at this moment, correct? what?? woe with me? are you serious with that nonsense. comical. you obviously have no clue what i rant about. i am absolutely sure you are one of the ones that cannot grasp the endless lawsuit game by design. and for the umpteenth time now, what exactly have we won? and as for your elementary-minded remarks about me being a loser, very cute.

 

[Jcwatchdog]

go look at 1994. and also you realize that we still cannot buy what you call AW in california and in other states, for that matter at this moment, correct? what?? woe with me? are you serious with that nonsense. comical. you obviously have no clue what i rant about. i am absolutely sure you are one of the ones that cannot grasp the endless lawsuit game by design. and for the umpteenth time now, what exactly have we won? and as for your elementary-minded remarks about me being a loser, very cute.

I didn’t call you a loser, but your mentality is that of one, even though you’re part of the winning side and don’t even realize it. Parts of the NFA were just done away with, carry is now shall issue in the US, and the scotus has just accepted cert for TWO Assault weapon cases, which they could have easily just denied or GVR since there was no circuit split at the time. I’m not sure why you’re bringing up 1994. The federal assault weapons ban? Yes that was in 1994 What has that got to do with anything? Heller didn’t happen until 2008, and McDonald in 2010. If we didn’t have those rulings and they had gone a different way, most guns would be banned completely in California, and many other states. So to ignore the wins we’ve had is short sighted. And as I’ve said before, it took time before the make up of the scotus went our way. You’re staring at all AW bans nationwide being struck down in less than a year now, in the best possible outcome we could have had. And you still look back at 1994 for some random reason?

 

[Enthused]

Allowing states the ability to restrict Constitutional rights however they feel like was a mistake.

Also that Kostas thread on Reddit is absolutely legendary. That thread should be pinned here at the top of the forum forever.

 

[Jcwatchdog]

uh huh sure. as for the rest of your post-- blah blah blah. same ol same ole rhetoric as what everyone says. and you never shown any change, just a bunch of words that say nothing more than still waiting due to lawsuits because they go on forever. just think about what you are saying. Just listen to yourself it is literally that simple. i have not even mentioned how bonta clearly said that he will not comply. and yet still nothing (shrugs)

You talk but say nothing of value. Lawsuits take time, all do. Things don’t change overnight, and sometimes take years.

You made a claim, prove it. Show where Bonta has ever said he would not comply with a scotus ruling. Appealing lower court rulings sure,he will do that every chance he gets. But the scotus is the end of the line. I’ll give you one of his statements after Bruen:

“the Attorney General now considers the ‘good cause’ requirements set forth in California Penal Code sections 26150(a)(2) and 26155(a)(2) to be unconstitutional and unenforceable.”

That was a direct result of the scotus ruling, and the “good cause” requirement pretty much banned CCWs being issued in places like San Francisco. We have more CCWs in California now than ever. The legislature then tried their Bruen response bills, but besides those being on shaky grounds because of Wolford, that wasn’t Bonta who unilaterally declared he was going to just not comply with Bruen.

So if you have any facts that show otherwise, please post them here. Not just the old woe is me, taking about past loses form 30 years ago, and saying a bunch of words without really saying anything.

 

[MK6M9]

You talk but say nothing of value. Lawsuits take time, all do. Things don’t change overnight, and sometimes take years.

You made a claim, prove it. Show where Bonta has ever said he would not comply with a scotus ruling. Appealing lower court rulings sure,he will do that every chance he gets. But the scotus is the end of the line. I’ll give you one of his statements after Bruen:

“the Attorney General now considers the ‘good cause’ requirements set forth in California Penal Code sections 26150(a)(2) and 26155(a)(2) to be unconstitutional and unenforceable.”

That was a direct result of the scotus ruling, and the “good cause” requirement pretty much banned CCWs being issued in places like San Francisco. We have more CCWs in California now than ever. The legislature then tried their Bruen response bills, but besides those being on shaky grounds because of Wolford, that wasn’t Bonta who unilaterally declared he was going to just not comply with Bruen.

So if you have any facts that show otherwise, please post them here. Not just the old woe is me, taking about past loses form 30 years ago, and saying a bunch of words without really saying anything.

uh huh, okay. thank you

 

[tradecraft]

My body and wallet are ready!

 

[Enthused]

Only 36 upvotes, and with 185 comments.

ORANGE MAN BAD!