👀

Protect him.

The Glock:

“We have examined the entire list of the guns and gun parts that were found after ATF decided to raid Adamiak’s home. Not a single item – not one– was illegal for him to possess. Some of the items that were actually used as evidence against him in court are laughable, or at least they would be if Adamiak wasn’t about to start the third year of his 20-year sentence. Every single one of the items seized as evidence and used against him in court are still legally sold online. Most can be purchased without any paperwork because they are not firearms. This is what the ATF does not want the public to know, that all their so-called illegal evidence was perfectly legal, and that all of their courtroom testimony was nothing but lies.” Article by @HT_GunWriter here - saf.org/category/ijp/

Breaking now: A federal judge has declared the post office carry ban unconstitutional and issued summary judgment to SAF and FPC, as well as the individual plaintiffs in the case.

On this day in 1992 marked the siege at Ruby Ridge. Today, we honor the memory of those lost and reaffirm our commitment to defending 2A rights against government overreach.

“Why do law-abiding Americans have to pay $200, submit a federal application, and jump through a series of legal hoops just to purchase a single silencer?  Besides, most of us shoot a lot more than at quarterly firearms qualifications, so our hearing is at serious risk.   One reader pointed out that suppressors are safety devices for the ATF but are considered a privilege for those of us who aren’t ATF agents. Unfortunately, he is 100% correct. The ATF is completely wrong in its reasoning. “ Link to full story by @HT_GunWriter below 👇 saf.org/atf-issuing-suppress…

Just ATF doing ATF things

In the SAF Supported case of Illinois v. Vivian Brown, Illinois' FOID Card has been declared unconstitutional by White County, Illinois Circuit Judge T. Scott Webb. The Opinion held that the possession of a firearm in one's home is constitutionally protected conduct, and that Illinois' FOID card requirement was not supported by the historical tradition of firearms regulation in the country. Read the full order here - saf.org/wp-content/uploads/2…

In our case McDonald v. Chicago, the Supreme Court agreed with SAF’s position, holding that the right to keep and bear arms was indeed incorporated into the Fourteenth Amendment through the Due Process Clause. As a result of this decision, state gun control could now be challenged in federal court on the grounds of Second Amendment protection. This landmark case and decision laid the groundwork for the vast majority of Second Amendment challenges today and truly marked the beginning of the end for many state gun control statutes and local gun control ordinances. Join the movement today at saf.org/join

“The jury was never told that all of these supposedly “illegal” arms are still sold online today, or that most don’t even require any paperwork to buy or sell.” Full story by @HT_GunWriter 👇 saf.org/how-atf-falsely-char…

AGAIN: Gun-free zone allows criminal to walk aimlessly throughout campus without any threat of retaliation because he knows students and faculty are unarmed.

🚨 MAJOR 2A LAWSUIT FILED: SAF and partners have filed another groundbreaking complaint against the ATF and DOJ in the Northern District of Texas. After the One Big Beautiful Bill Act eliminated taxes on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and other NFA items, the NFA’s invasive registration scheme is left without constitutional basis—it’s no longer a tax measure and violates the Second Amendment. This suit argues the NFA exceeds Congress’s powers for untaxed firearms and infringes on the right to keep and bear common arms like suppressors and SBRs, which are neither dangerous nor unusual. Law-abiding Americans shouldn’t face felony charges for exercising their rights without government tracking. See complaint here: saf.org/wp-content/uploads/2… Support the cause: Donate, share, and join at: saf.org/join

No Tax = No NFA Article by @JohnPetrolino - bearingarms.com/john-petroli…

Major blow. It’s in the hands of GOP senate to bring this back to life.

OUTRAGEOUS ABUSE OF POWER: Jack Harrington, a lawful gun owner, was pulled from class and had his vehicle searched by NH school officials without cause or consent—all because he owns a firearm (stored safely at home). This 4A breach won’t stand. Full complaint here: saf.org/wp-content/uploads/2… Support SAF’s defense of your rights at saf.org/give

FREE THE SILENCERS

This guy 🤦‍♂️

“No one is trying to take your guns.” 🙄

The audacity

SAF Wins. . . again! California Carry Ban STOPPED in its tracks. More to come…

We’ve wasted no time in taking on Newsom’s ban on Glocks and other guns with a cruciform trigger bar design. California’s handgun selection is already very limited thanks to its roster law, and while there’s been some improvement thanks to our prior litigation getting microstamping enjoined, taking away even more options from this already-constrained market is unacceptable and unconstitutional. Proponents of the bill claim the ban is about preventing “Glock switches” from being attached to handguns. But that is already illegal. In fact, possession of such a switch is itself a serious crime, even without it being attached to a gun. Moreover, the impetus for this bill was a shooting committed by someone who was already prohibited from owning guns at all due to prior violent felonies, and who had been released from prison several years early. A short thread on our complaint.

-71% of gunshot victims had previous arrest records -64% had been convicted of a crime -Each had an average 11 prior arrests -63% of victims had criminal histories and 73% of that group knew their assailant (2x as often as victims without criminal history) But yeah, the guns.

Wise words from @SenWarren :

LET’S GO! We are thrilled to announce the hiring of @MorosKostas as Director of Legal Research and Education here at the Second Amendment Foundation. Press release here - saf.org/saf-names-kostas-mor…

Defend sovereignty. Stand with us by joining at saf.org/join

Story by @HT_GunWriter 👇 . . . . . . . . . . ATF agents took two inert RPGs they had seized from Patrick “Tate” Adamiak’s home, inserted an RPG training device and a bunch of additional parts, fired a few 7.62x39mm rounds and classified them as Destructive Devices. Were it not for these charges, Adamiak would be a free man. However, the agents never said in their reports or courtroom testimony that the RPG training device will fire rounds on its own—without an RPG even in the room. Also, agents never mentioned that the ATF itself classifies the RPG training device as a firearm, because it can shoot rifle rounds regardless of whether it’s attached to an RPG. In a letter sent to someone not involved in Adamiak’s case, The ATF explained the RPG training devices. “The sub-caliber RPG-7 training devices previously evaluated, like the ones you mention, typically contain a barrel chambered in 7.62x39mm, possess a firing mechanism including a striker, sear, and trigger device. Its intended use is as a subcaliber insert training device for the RPG-7 anti-armor projector. However, the design of the device also allows it to be fired without the use of an RPG-7,” the ATF said in the letter. The ATF also never mentioned that the entire device—an RPG and the 7.62x39mm training device—were sold to the public on GunBroker.   “This one’s been modified a little to color within the lines of the National Firearms Act of 1934. First, it can’t load or fire a live PG-7V or other rocket-propelled grenade round, only the subcaliber device. Second, ATF interprets a subcaliber device as a ‘firearm,’ not any specific kind of firearm, but installing it in an RPG-7V, even one that’s been modified so that it cannot fire live rounds, creates a ‘short-barreled rifle,’” a Loadout Room story states. This offer was not an experiment as to whether ATF would approve the sale. The entire device had been approved by ATF’s Firearm Technology Branch, and the seller had the ATF approval letter, which they included in the kit. The “Rocket launcher training kit” came with the following items: 1Aluminum hard case, with wheels 2RPG-7 Rocket Launcher 3Optical Sight with soft case 4Bipod assembly 5Sling 6PG-7 7.62x39mm Subcaliber Firearm 77.62mm BoreSnake bore cleaner 815 rounds of 7.62x39mm Spotter/Tracer Ammunition 930 rounds of 7.62x39mm Tracer Ammunition 10Letter from the ATF which states the launcher is not a destructive device This shoots large holes into the ATF’s case against Adamiak. Link to full story - saf.org/even-the-atf-now-adm…

In a case we are closely watching: A Ninth Circuit panel has overturned California’s burdensome and error-prone ammunition background check regime in a case we have been watching closely, Rhode v. Bonta. We congratulate our friends and frequent litigation partners at CRPA on this significant win. Besides such background checks being unprecedented, the other big problem with California’s system is it does not even work well, worsening the constitutional concerns with it. By the state’s own admission, it wrongly denied over 10% of applicants who tried to use it, and the State did not bother to tell those people why they were denied, so many did not subsequently purchase ammunition. Data that Judge Benitez forced the State to disclose showed that of the 7,342 people wrongly rejected in January of 2023, only 62.9% managed to successfully purchase ammunition by July 1, 2023. Over a third, around 2700 people, were either denied their rights or forced to purchase ammunition through illegal means. To make matters worse, this background check costs a dollar each time you do it, and it will now be increasing to $5. If you do not have a firearm registered at your current address, then you have to do a costlier $19 background check to purchase ammunition. We are relieved the panel ruled correctly, but of course given this is the Ninth Circuit, en banc review is certainly possible. 🧵👇

The entire gun industry hearing the news about Kash Patel as ATF Director:

SAF Win - US District Court rules Federal ban on Young Adults purchasing handguns from FFL’s is unconstitutional! @theadamkraut & @johnbryanesq

It is our responsibility to press on, win or lose, and continue to challenge the unconstitutionality of gun control measures. Join SAF today at saf.org/join

BREAKING: SAF seeks extraordinary relief from SCOTUS by seeking certiorari before judgment in challenge to Maryland's Assault Weapons Ban. The Fourth Circuit's decision to hear this case en banc, over a year after it was argued before a panel and with no published opinion, seems to imply the court desired to take this case away from a panel with which it disagreed. SAF is now asking SCOTUS to intervene and end the lower courts refusal to faithfully apply Heller and Bruen. @MorosKostas @fourboxesdiner @Guns_Gadgets @TheReloadSite

Happy Birthday to the one and only, Justice Clarence Thomas, who turns 77 today. 🫡

We have a judgment in Reese v. ATF, one of our two cases challenging the federal ban on FFL's selling handguns to adults under 21. SAF won this case at the Fifth Circuit, with the court finding that the ban violated the Second Amendment, and remanded the case back to the District Court for entry of a judgment to that effect. In the District Court a dispute arose between SAF and the Government as to the scope of the injunction: I.e. who was covered. SAF's position is that all SAF members are covered by the injunction, as the case was brought on behalf of all members. The Government took a much narrower approach, Regrettably the court appears to have adopted the Government's position in total. As a result, the injunction in the case (in the context of SAF members specifically) only covers SAF members who were members at the time the case was filed on November 6, 2020, and who are located in the geographical bounds of the Fifth Circuit (Texas, Mississippi and Louisiana). To make matters worse, the court has also required that the membership organizational plaintiffs provide full lists of all affected members within 21 days. To be clear: SAF will not be turning over any lists of membership information to the government. We are frustrated that this judgment acknowledges that the challenged law is unconstitutional, while preventing its enforcement against essentially no one. SAF and our partners are considering all of our legal options and will have updates forthcoming.

Bruen was intended to recognize the general right to publicly carry arms for self defense, as established by the Second Amendment. While a few "sensitive places" may exist, they are supposed to be the rare exception to that general right. If essentially everywhere can be "sensitive," as the Third Circuit ruled (with the exception of the Vampire Rule), then there effectively is no meaningful right to carry. Our en banc petition asks the Third Circuit to correct that.

The Supreme Court has denied SAF’s Petition for Cert in Snope v Brown, our challenge to the Maryland Assault Weapons Ban. Justice Thomas wrote a lengthy dissent from the denial, and was joined in his position that cert should have been granted by Justices Alito and Gorsuch. Justice Kavanaugh wrote his own separate statement respecting the cert denial. As we read through the statements more details will be forthcoming.

“Kavanaugh, Coney Barrett Defect: Allow Whole Class of Guns to Be Banned in Multiple States” westernjournal.com/kavanaugh…

Uhhhhh. What? breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/…

🚨🚨🚨🚨 When President Trump signs the One Big Beautiful Bill — which will eliminate the excise tax on suppressors, short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, and AOWs — he will have delivered the biggest blow to the National Firearms Act since its passage nearly a century ago. We thank President Trump for his leadership and every member of Congress who fought for law-abiding gun owners throughout the reconciliation process. By eliminating the excise tax on these NFA items, the OBBB will not only lift the heavy burden of an unconstitutional tax from the backs of hard-working Americans, it will also serve as a critical step towards our ultimate goal of dismantling the NFA once and for all. But there is much work yet to be done. While we will continue to fight for the total legislative elimination of the NFA, our organizations are proud to stand together in a new strategic lawsuit to challenge the constitutionality of the NFA in Federal Court. Read the letter here - saf.org/wp-content/uploads/2…

👀

As we expected, Governor Newsom has signed three major antigun bills in California. All three bills will take effect in January. SAF is reviewing each bill and considering the next steps. The first and most high-profile is AB 1127, which is the Glock Sales Ban. The bill bans the sale of "any semiautomatic pistol with a cruciform trigger bar that can be readily converted by hand or with common household tools, as defined in 11 C.C.R 4082, into a machinegun by the installation or attachment of a pistol converter as a replacement for the slide’s backplate without any additional engineering, machining, or modification of the pistol’s trigger mechanism." The bill also states that "A polymer notch or other piece of polymer molded into the rear of the pistol frame does not prevent ready conversion into a machinegun and will not prevent a pistol from qualifying under this definition." In plain English, this basically means Glocks and Glock-clones, such as the Shadow Systems guns that recently made the roster, unless they find a way to permanently block the attachment of illegal "switches." Next is SB 704, the barrel background check law. Gun barrel sales will now have to go through an FFL in California, no more direct shipping. They conduct a background check, for which the state charges $5. The background checks on barrels will start in July of 2027. Finally, there is AB 1078. This one is the only one of the bunch that does both good and bad. On the bad side, it sets a three-guns-per-month limit. This is in direct response to our win in Nguyen v. Bonta, which struck down California's one-gun-per-month limit. It also bans guns on public transportation, even with a CCW permit, unless the gun is locked up. On the good side, it essentially codifies our nonresident carry win in CRPA v. LASD, and that win will thus finally apply to more than just the members of SAF, CRPA, GOA, and GOC starting in January. Also on the good side, temporary restraining orders issued without a hearing are no longer grounds to deny a CCW permit. This scenario arose when someone had a restraining order issued against them on false grounds, then had that order dissolved upon an actual hearing a few weeks later. Well, under California law, even if the order was dissolved upon a hearing, just the issuance of that temporary order banned you from getting a CCW permit for five years. No more. One of our plaintiffs in CRPA v. LASD went through this, and this aspect of the bill may be in response to our lawsuit too. Below you will find links to each of the bills so those interested can read further.

Our case Snope v. Brown has been redistributed for conference Thursday, April 17th.

“This ‘law’ is unconstitutional,” Pierce County Sheriff Keith Swank posted on X. “PCSO will not enforce it. Join me and fight for our rights.” @guntruth article - thetruthaboutguns.com/washin…

“We can confirm that suppressors were provided to qualifying agents in the Criminal Investigation Occupation Series 1811 for health and safety due to the extensive training and quarterly firearms qualifications they must complete. For operational purposes, ATF does not comment on specific firearms used nor the number of firearms held,” ATF’s Public Affairs Division said in an email. Read full story by @HT_GunWriter here - saf.org/atf-agents-discussed…

BREAKING: In a 3-0 panel decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has UPHELD SAF's Summary Judgment win in Nguyen v. Bonta, our challenge to California's "One Gun Per Month" gun rationing law. The panel held that California’s law is facially unconstitutional because the plain text of the Second Amendment protects the possession of multiple firearms and protects against meaningful constraints on the acquisition of firearms through purchase - and - that the nation's history and tradition of firearm regulations do not support such constraints on acquisition. This is a huge win for SAF and the people of California. Stay tuned here for further developments! @Guns_Gadgets @Guns_com @guntruth @BearingArmsCom @aarmark @Guntalk

In a ruling concerning "assault weapon" and "large capacity" magazine bans, the Second Circuit has upheld the bans. SAF is a plaintiff in one of the consolidated cases. The result is not surprising, given the Second Circuit's well-known hostility in cases like this one. It is also similar to many other rulings we have seen in cases like this, so an extensive look at the ruling is probably not necessary. That said, this thread will point out a few of the ways the Second Circuit errs in its ostensible Heller/Bruen analysis.

Your tyrant of the week - @ChrisMurphyCT

By @HT_GunWriter 👇👇 . . . . . . . . The millions of law-abiding Americans who have chosen to carry a concealed firearm are putting “everyone involved at risk,” the ATF announced this week in a tweet on X. “Take a look into our world. This is a scenario @ATFWasington frequently faces when combatting violent crime and maintaining public safety. Many people attempt to conceal firearms on their person or belongings which puts everyone involved at risk. #MakeDCSafeAgain #ATF,” the ATF tweeted on X. As you can imagine, ATF’s message received hundreds of overwhelmingly negative responses including many that are not fit to reprint. “Concealed carry is not the issue—you are. Millions of law-abiding citizens carry concealed every single day without incident. Concealed carry saves lives. Disarming people and vilifying them on social media doesn’t,” Ammoland News posted. Noted Second Amendment scholar and attorney Mark W. Smith asked a prominent Justice Department civil rights attorney in a tweet to “speak with the Washington ATF field office about the Second Amendment and the Bruen decision. I suspect their social media person lacks the relevant knowledge.” Aiden Johnston, director of federal affairs for Gun Owners of America, tweeted “Try reading Heller, McDonald, Bruen, and the Second Amendment again, tyrants.” In his tweet, he added a picture of the Bruen decision. **Link to full story - saf.org/atf-says-concealed-c…

BREAKING: Trump administration amicus brief supports striking down assault weapons and magazine capacity bans!

YEP

The federal government is suing the Los Angeles County Sheriff's Department because of its "deliberate pattern of unconscionable delay that renders this constitutional right meaningless in practice." This follows our own pending lawsuit of CRPA v. LASD, which covers the same issue and won a preliminary injunction, though that injunction was limited to the named plaintiffs in the case only. A thread on the complaint!

Big facts.

Name something scarier than this… we’ll wait.

BREAKING: The order-mandated disclosure of our membership list is now off the record in Reese v. ATF.

This case concerns a defendant charged with possession of an unregistered short-barrel rifle. Skipping the Bruen analysis altogether, the 11th Circuit ruled relying entirely on U.S. v. Miller (1939) that the question was already decided, and the restrictions on SBRs are constitutional because the Supreme Court in Miller said restrictions on short-barrel shotguns are constitutional. As part of our ongoing efforts to keep the pressure up on the Supreme Court, we filed an amicus brief in support of certiorari, and plan to file more in similar cases in addition to litigating cases of our own. A thread on this brief.

TYRANT OF THE WEEK Apologies to all you Cheech and Chong fans but we can’t let this one slide. Fight tyranny at saf.org/join 🇺🇸

BREAKING: SAF files Petition for Cert with the United States Supreme Court in Harrel v. Raoul, challenging the constitutionality of Illinois’ recently enacted assault weapons and magazine capacity bans, in response to the Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals outrageous conclusion that neither were protected by the Second Amendment.

It’s hard out here for a tyrant @CAgovernor

Denying the Second Amendment to adults who have secured all their other constitutional rights at the age of 18 does not make sense, and cannot be constitutional. If you can vote, serve in the military, and live on your own, you have the right to the effective means of self-defense. The petition starts by pointing out the circuit split on the issue. The Fourth Circuit's ruling here conflicts with the Fifth Circuit's ruling in Reese v. ATF. As a result, 18-20 year old adults in one part of the country have different rights than they do in another. That is untenable.

FRT trigger case settled: DOJ Drops their suit against FRT. FRT agrees not to develop FRT’s for pistols and to enforce their patent so other companies don’t hop on and proliferate.

By @HT_GunWriter 👇 . . . . . . . . . . . The criminal case against Patrick “Tate” Adamiak is the first time the government has ever applied the National Firearms Act to a bunch of gun parts that the ATF still allows for unrestricted sale without requiring any federal paperwork or even ID, which somehow led to Adamiak’s 20-year federal prison sentence, his attorney Matthew Larosiere said in a document filed this week with an appellate court. Larosiere is asking to present his case to the entire U.S. Court of Appeal for the Fourth Circuit, after a panel of three appellate judges heard the case, because “the panel opinion overlooks and misapprehends material facts and controlling law, and because the questions presented are of exceptional importance.” Larosiere has three main legal issues: “The panel overlooked or misapprehended the undisputed record evidence that all items underlying Appellant’s convictions were non-functional relics requiring material alteration and fabrication, not mere assembly, to become NFA-subject weapons. This renders the evidence legally insufficient. The panel misapprehended and failed to address Appellant’s preserved Second Amendment challenge, short-circuiting the Bruen test and treating the challenged conduct as categorically valid without conducting the required inquiry. The panel insisted that a bill of particulars would have cured the notice issues in the indictment, but it is a settled rule that a bill of particulars cannot save an invalid indictment.” Larosiere then put the main issues of this case into layman’s terms. “These issues are exceptionally important because the government is applying the statutes here at issue to items the government has—for decades—explicitly permitted the unrestricted commercial sale,” he wrote. “There has been no intervening change in law, and in fact the very same items Appellant was charged with are still routinely and openly commercially sold.” Full story here - saf.org/adamiaks-attorney-st…

Even if the public did support Assault Weapons Bans, we’d still continue to sue governments adopting these unconstitutional laws. We currently have 7 challenges to AWBs around the country. thehill.com/homenews/state-w…

Good Morning only to the people that like guns 🙂

Yesterday, SAF scored another victory when a Federal District Court ruled that the ban on Young Adults purchasing firearms from an FFL was unconstitutional. Read more here: breitbart.com/2nd-amendment/…

You might remember this 🤡 from a few weeks ago but he’s officially our tyrant of the week with this banger 🔥

Shall. Not. Be. Infringed. Join the movement today at saf.org/join

The American history of arms regulation neither supports the gate keeping of arms ownership behind a tax wall, nor required registration

So much wisdom.

“Under this Court's Second Amendment precedents, moreover, it can be analytically difficult to distinguish the AR-15s at issue here from the handguns at issue in Heller. AR-15s are semi-automatic, but so too are most handguns.(Semi-automatic handguns and rifles are distinct from automatic firearms such as the M-16 automatic rifle used by the military.) Law-abiding citizens use both AR-15s and handguns for a variety of lawful purposes, including self-defense in the home. For their part, criminals use both AR-15s and handguns, as well as a variety of other lawful weapons and products, in unlawful ways that threaten public safety. But handguns can be more easily carried and concealed than rifles, and handguns-not rifles-are used in the vast majority of murders and other violent crimes that individuals commit with guns in America.” -Statement of KAVANAUGH, J. Read Snope denial here: saf.org/wp-content/uploads/2…

The White House has announced an executive order to protect the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. The order directs the Attorney General to evaluate the constitutionality of firearms-related action taken by the Biden administration. (Order in photos)

BREAKING NEWS: Federal District Judge grants preliminary injunction in SAF's challenge to multiple elements of California's so-called Bruen Response Bill! More to come!

Uh no, but they should be.

I’m not saying it’s all us… but I am saying you’re welcome.

Breaking: The Ninth Circuit has clarified that its earlier ruling striking down California's gun advertising ban on ads that "reasonably appear to be attractive to minors" as violating the First Amendment, applies to the statute in its entirety, and not only some subsections, as the District Court had held on remand. Read here - saf.org/wp-content/uploads/2… @CRPAnews @MorosKostas @News2ATeam @Guns_Gadgets @guntruth

BREAKING: Apparently President Trump has taken the White House office for gun violence protection page, off line.

Judge Kacsmaryk has now taken things a step further in the related Britto case. His ruling stays enforcement of the law as it applies to everyone across the country.

BREAKING The Supreme Court has denied Cert in Worth v Harrington, SAF’s challenging to Minnesota’s Young Adult Carry Ban. In denying Cert, our win in the 8th Circuit now stands as the final judgment in the case. This win will have repercussions around the country, where SAF is fighting similar bans in multiple states.

A gun control activist has sparked outrage in his hometown after lying about surviving a high school shooting which never took place. Calvin Polachek, 23, claimed that his brother, best friend and nine classmates were killed in 2017 during a violent rampage at Dallas High School in rural Pennsylvania. In an emotional speech before the Kentucky State Capitol in February, Polachek recounted the horror of returning to campus a week after the alleged tragedy. He claimed that he was forced to routinely, ‘walk past that spot where I saw my best friend and pretend it was all normal’. ‘It was not normal,’ he told the crowd, adding: ‘Folks, that’s been eight years, and I’ve been talking about this every single day since then for eight years. ‘Eight years of talking about this, and there’s been nothing that’s changed.’ However it has since emerged that the business student lied about his ordeal and that the shooting ‘never occurred’, per Dallas Township Police Chief Doug Higgins. **link to full story - dailymail.co.uk/news/article…

By @HT_GunWriter The open carry of any commonly used firearm—rifles, shotguns or handguns—is now 100% legal in Florida. Only California, Connecticut and Illinois still bar their citizens from openly carrying arms. In a letter sent Monday morning, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier warned all state prosecutors and every Florida law enforcement agency about McDaniels v. State, in which the First District Court of Appeal struck down Florida’s ban on the open carry of arms. “Because no other appellate court has considered the constitutionality of Section 790.053 under Bruen and Rahimi, the First District’s decision is binding on all Florida’s trial courts. Effectively, the McDaniels decision is now the law of the State,” Uthmeier wrote. “Because no Florida court will any longer be empowered to convict a defendant for violating Section 790.053(1), prudence counsels that prosecutors and law enforcement personnel should likewise refrain from arresting or prosecuting law-abiding citizens carrying a firearm in a manner that is visible to others.” Floridians and visitors who have long sought to openly carry a firearm have two men to thank, defense attorney Eric Friday, who also serves as general counsel for Florida Carry, Inc., and his former client, Stanley Victor McDaniels. On the Fourth of July 2022, McDaniels armed himself with a loaded handgun which was visible in his pants, tucked in an inside-the-waistband holster, and a copy of the United States Constitution, which he carried in his non-shooting hand. He chose a spot in downtown Pensacola, Florida and set up a camera on a tripod to record his historic events. When police asked him for identification, McDaniels gave them his Florida Concealed Carry permit. Officers removed his firearm from his pants but gave him back his holster. Six days later, McDaniels was arrested for violating Florida’s open-carry ban. He was found guilty but appealed to the state’s First District Court of Appeal, which issued its ruling last week. **full story here - saf.org/how-floridas-gun-com…

Good Morning only to the people that support the 2nd Amendment ☀️

Illinois Gov. Pritzker FURIOUS as Sheriffs Refuse to Enforce Gun Law ammoland.com/2023/01/il-gov-…

As disappointing as this week may have been with cert denial in Snope, we want to remind you that we still have SEVEN active AWB challenges thanks to your continued support of SAF legal work. Over 80% of every dollar donated goes directly to the SAF mission. We aren’t letting off the gas, and neither should you. Join or give today at saf.org/give And stay informed by signing up for our newsletter at saf.org/newsletter

Who had “federal government supports SAF position that assault weapons bans and magazine capacity bans are unconstitutional” on their bingo cards?!

SAF and its partners have filed a new lawsuit challenging California's recently signed Glock Ban. Signed this past Friday, AB 1127 effectively bans the commercial sale of all Glock and Glock platform handguns. This is the same California, mind you, that is already subject to an injunction over the unconstitutionality of its "Unsafe Handgun Act" - or approved handgun roster. Rather than respecting the Second Amendment rights of its residents, California lawmakers instead expanded their ban on commonly owned handguns. You can read all about Jaymes v. Bonta at SAF.org Read complaint here - saf.org/wp-content/uploads/2…

New SAF lawsuit dropped. courtlistener.com/docket/677…

BREAKING: SAF and its partners, American Suppressor Association, National Rifle Association, and Firearms Policy Coalition have filed a historic and landmark lawsuit challenging the National Firearms Act (NFA). In the aftermath of the signing of the Big Beautiful Bill, reducing the tax burden on many NFA items to $0, the underlying constitutional justification for the law has evaporated. With this newly filed lawsuit, Second Amendment Foundation is excited to further pursue the dismantling of the NFA in federal court. Stay tuned here and anywhere else you find SAF updates for forthcoming updates on Brown v. ATF.

BREAKING NEWS: A unanimous panel of the Fifth Ciruit Court of Appeals has held that the federal prohibition on the ability of adults under age 21 to purchase a handgun from a FFL is inconsistent with the Second Amendment. The court has remanded the case back to the District Court for judgment, consistent with their findings. You can read more about he case, Reese v. ATF, at SAF.Org.

What should we do next???

LET’S GO

In breaking news, the United States Supreme Court has distributed Snope v. Brown, SAF’s challenge to the Maryland Assault Weapons Ban, for conference on Feb. 21. In this potentially landmark move, the Supreme Court may once and for all settle the issue as to the government’s ability to outright ban the most popular rifles in America. Follow all SAF social media and on SAF.org for updates and to learn how YOU can support this monumental case. @fourboxesdiner @aarmark @PrimaryArms @theadamkraut @Guns_Gadgets @Guntalk @JohnPetrolino

BREAKING: The Ninth Circuit has finalized its ruling in our favor, overturning California’s “one-gun-per-month” restriction, setting a historic precedent as the court’s first final judgment to strike down a law on Second Amendment grounds.

SAF Stands United with ASA, GOA, FPC, NRA, NASGW, and F.AI.R. Trade Group, along with millions of gun owners across America, to oppose the procedural block on removing suppressors and SBFs from the NFA tax scheme, urging Congress to act swiftly to protect Second Amendment rights.

by @HT_GunWriter 👇 Anyone who still believes that former U.S. Navy Petty Officer 1st Class Patrick “Tate” Adamiakmust have done something wrong or illegal in order to justify his 20-year federal prison sentence need only look at the documents his team has just released. The documents are damning, but not for Adamiak. The documents are damning for the ATF. The documents show that the ATF was severely screwed after they stormed into Adamiak’s home based solely on an informant’s misinformation, because they found nothing illegal. The documents show how the ATF then took extremely questionable steps to charge the now 31-year-old with illegally possessing 31 machineguns and four destructive devices, even though none of the items the ATF found are actually machineguns or destructive devices. After their botched raid, the ATF had to try something – anything – to avoid looking like complete idiots, Adamiak’s father believes. However, the actions ATF took only made the entire situation much worse. Adamiak had no prior criminal record until the ATF kicked in his doors. He was already in the pipeline to become a U.S. Navy SEAL. For those who value freedom, even a quick review of Adamiak’s documents will bring on confusion and possibly even anger – none more so than the page about his toy STEN submachinegun. The fact it was a toy wasn’t enough for ATF agents, who were desperately seeking criminal charges. “After disassembling the replica, ATF agents inserted a real STEN bolt and barrel sourced from the agency’s own inventory into the toy, crudely securing the parts with electrical tape. Because the prop couldn’t accept a magazine, they manually chambered a single round, fired it, and used this staged action to penalize Tate with possession of an unregistered machine gun,” the documents state. Full story here - saf.org/hey-atf-nothing-you-…

The Supreme Court has now requested a response in Robinson v. US, the SBR case we recently submitted an amicus brief in. This does not mean that this case will get granted cert, but it is the first hurdle that needs to be cleared in that process. It tells us that at least one Justice wants to hear the government's response to the petition, indicating at least mild interest in the petition. When no response is requested, it typically means the petition is denied following its first scheduled conference.

It's strange that New Jersey now is very concerned the common use test would make machine guns protected, considering they have long argued AR15s can be banned because they are just like machine guns.