California has long held a reputation as one of, if not the most restrictive, states in the nation when it comes to the right to keep and bear arms. they have tons of laws that limit what you can buy, who can buy it, where it can be bought, how it has to be bought, where you can have it, and everything except how long your armpit hair has to be while carrying a firearm.
That might be coming next session, though.
Still, it's rough there, and while gun rights groups have fought them every step of the way, it's only been since 2025 that the Department of Justice has been willing to join in the fight.
Now, the media is asking if the state can defend these laws.
California Democrats are used to defending gun control measures against lawsuits by Second Amendment advocates like the California Rifle and Pistol Association.
Now, the state is facing a lawsuit from the Trump administration targeting a new law restricting sales of Glock semi-automatic handguns.
Since July 1, the state has prohibited the sale of Glock handguns and various off-brand imitators that can be converted to fully automatic guns — which are already illegal under state and federal laws, with some exceptions — after inserting a converter into the gun.
The U.S. Department of Justice is challenging the law, saying it bans the sale “of the most popular handgun in America” and that it “obviously violates the Second Amendment.” California can enforce its law while the lawsuit proceeds, a judge ruled Thursday.
The article notes that state officials say the law doesn't really ban Glocks; it merely says that gun manufacturers have to make guns a certain way if they want to sell them in California. That might be meaningful if it weren't for the fact that the kind of design they outlawed was, in fact, the very design used in every Glock firearm since the company sold its first pistol.
Also, interestingly, the only person they reached out to for a quote was Adam Skaggs from Giffords.
Typical.
Anyway, I do think the question is a fair one, because the odds aren't looking too spiffy for the Golden State these days. The problem is that court cases take time, and Trump has only a couple years left in office. Will the next guy, whoever it is, continue with that work? I doubt we'll get final rulings on these matters before Trump's term expires, so that's going to be a big question in 2028, to be sure.
If they continue, I don't see any way California wins. I just don't. Not when you look at the text of Bruen, there's literally nothing in American history, tradition, or the Second Amendment that supports restricting a gun because of what a third party might do with it. Nothing at all, and when you think about everything else already under fire, including the state's assault weapon ban, I suspect that the state might look very different in a couple of years.
And hopefully, those changes keep on a-comin'.
Editor’s Note: The radical Left will stop at nothing to enact their radical gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.
Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun control policies and schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.
Join the conversation as a VIP Member