DOJ Challenges California Gun Laws
DOJ Sues California Challenging Glock Ban and Handgun Roster Over Second Amendment
Key Points
The DOJ's 17-page complaint argues the Glock ban is presumptively unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, contending it deprives Californians of access to widely used handguns.
Before filing, Harmeet Dhillon offered Gov. Newsom and AG Bonta a one-week window to pursue pre-suit settlement negotiations; the deadline passed without a commitment to settle.
The lawsuit also challenges California's handgun roster, arguing it, too, is unconstitutional and restricts which handguns may be sold in the state.
DOJ officials cite a recent Supreme Court ruling on carrying guns in private spaces and warn they may sue states that ban handgun possession on private property without owner consent, signaling a broader federal policing approach following that decision.
The U.S. Department of Justice sued California on July 1, 2026 — the same day the state's new gun law took effect — challenging a ban on Glock-style handgun sales and the state's decades-old list of approved firearms. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said at a morning press conference that "California cannot treat the Second Amendment as a second-class right," calling the Glock ban a direct defiance of Supreme Court precedent. NBC Los Angeles and Los Angeles Times reported the 17-page complaint was filed in federal court in the Eastern District of California.
The law, known as AB 1127, bans commercial sales of Glock-style semiautomatic handguns in California. It was signed by Governor Gavin Newsom in September 2025. The DOJ argues the ban is presumptively unconstitutional because it blocks law-abiding citizens from buying one of the most widely owned handguns in America.
California Ignored a One-Week Federal Warning to Settle
Before filing, Civil Rights Chief Harmeet Dhillon sent a formal letter to Governor Newsom and Attorney General Rob Bonta on June 24, 2026. The letter gave California one week to agree to pause AB 1127 and avoid a lawsuit. The deadline passed at 5:00 PM on June 30 with no commitment from Sacramento, according to Daily Signal.
Dhillon said at the press conference that "we gave California every opportunity to avoid this." She called the lawsuit "the first step in a broader federal policing approach" to protect gun rights. Newsom fired back the same morning, calling the DOJ "a radical department doing the bidding of the gun lobby," and vowing to fight the case in court.
What AB 1127 Bans — and What It Does Not
AB 1127 stops gun stores from selling new Glock-style handguns in California. The state said the ban is needed because of "Glock switches" — small, 3D-printable devices that convert a semi-automatic pistol into a fully automatic weapon. The Los Angeles Times noted the law targets the Glock platform specifically because its design is seen as uniquely vulnerable to this modification.
Attorney General Bonta stressed that owning a Glock remains legal. Private transfers between individuals are also still allowed. "This is a common-sense regulation of commercial sales," Bonta said. But the DOJ counters that the same guns are carried daily by roughly 85% of U.S. law enforcement officers, undermining the argument that they are unsafe or unusual firearms.
The Handgun Roster Has Blocked New Models Since 2001
The DOJ complaint also targets California's handgun roster, a list first created under the 2001 Unsafe Handgun Act. To get on the list, a gun must pass drop-safety tests and include microstamping technology — a feature that stamps a gun's serial number onto fired cartridges. Because that technology was not commercially available for years, no new Glock Gen 4 or Gen 5 models have been approved for sale in California. The roster has effectively frozen the market, according to NBC Los Angeles.
Gun rights groups cheered the lawsuit. The Firearms Policy Coalition called the roster "a slow-motion ban" that has kept modern safety features off the market for two decades. The DOJ's complaint argues the roster, like the Glock ban itself, restricts which firearms citizens may buy and therefore violates the Second Amendment under the standard set by the Supreme Court's 2022 Bruen decision.
DOJ Signals More Lawsuits Against Other State Gun Laws
The DOJ made clear this case is not a one-off. Officials said they are watching other states and may sue over laws that ban handgun possession on private property without the owner's explicit consent — a reference to a recent Supreme Court ruling on guns in private spaces. If California's roster falls in court, similar rosters in Massachusetts and Maryland could also face legal challenges, Los Angeles Times reported.
Everytown for Gun Safety called the DOJ suit "an unprecedented interference in state-level public safety measures." Gun control advocates warned that striking down the roster could flood California with handguns lacking basic safety features like magazine disconnects or loaded-chamber indicators. For now, the case heads to federal court, where the constitutional fight over what the Second Amendment allows states to ban is far from settled.
Sentiment
Mostly NegativePublishers
12
Articles
9
Reach
21
