Pending legislation and litigation

Ohio Attorney General asks lawmakers to fix state NFA registration rules

Letter of Oct. 23, 2026 · Ohio Attorney General's Office

Status:

Ohio law makes it a crime to make, possess or use a suppressor, short-barreled rifle or short-barreled shotgun unless it's approved (registered) with ATF. After ATF stopped enforcing federal NFA registration on Oct. 9, 2026, Attorney General Andy Wilson asked Senate President Rob McColley and House Speaker Matt Huffman to clarify the law or eliminate the state registration requirement, warning that the confusion could lead owners to break Ohio law without realizing it.

What it would change: If lawmakers act, Ohioans could own these items without federal registration under state law. Until then, Ohio's registration requirement still applies.

NSSF v. Torrez (7-day waiting period)

No. 1:26-cv-03514 · U.S. District Court, District of New Mexico

Status:

Firearm industry and gun-rights groups, New Mexico dealers and a gun owner filed a new lawsuit against the Attorney General over New Mexico's 7-day waiting period. An earlier case (Ortega v. Lujan Grisham) ended with relief for only two named plaintiffs, and the state still enforces the waiting period for everyone else. This suit asks for broader relief.

What it would change: If the challengers win, the waiting period could be blocked for many more buyers and sellers, not just the two Ortega plaintiffs.

Heeter v. James (body armor purchase ban)

No. 1:24-cv-00623 · U.S. District Court, Western District of New York

Status:

A federal judge ruled that body armor is an 'arm' protected by the Second Amendment and that New York's ban on most people buying it is unconstitutional. The judge permanently barred the Attorney General, the State Police and the two named district attorneys (Erie and Monroe counties) from enforcing the purchase and sale ban, but put that order on hold for 14 days so the state can appeal.

What it would change: If the order takes effect and holds up on appeal, the state couldn't enforce its ban on buying and selling body armor. District attorneys outside Erie and Monroe counties aren't named in the order, though. While the stay lasts, the ban remains enforceable.

Next key date: 14-day stay of the injunction ends, unless extended, November 4, 2026

Nebraska Attorney General: NFA registration guidance

Guidance of Oct. 21, 2026 · Nebraska Attorney General's Office

Status:

After ATF stopped enforcing NFA registration for suppressors, short-barreled rifles and short-barreled shotguns on Oct. 9, 2026, Nebraska's Attorney General posted guidance saying his office believes Nebraskans may presumptively possess these items under both federal and Nebraska law without registering, unless they're otherwise barred from having guns (for example, by a felony conviction). The office also notes it is challenging NFA registration in ongoing Missouri litigation.

What it would change: This is the office's reading of the law, not a new statute or court ruling. If federal policy or court rulings change, the guidance could change too.

Viramontes v. Cook County and Grant v. Higgins

Nos. 25-238 and 25-566 · U.S. Supreme Court

Status:

These two cases ask the Supreme Court whether the Second Amendment protects AR-15-platform and similar semiautomatic rifles. One comes from Cook County, Illinois, and the other from Connecticut's 'assault weapon' ban. The Court agreed to hear them together.

What it would change: A ruling could decide whether state and local 'assault weapon' bans can stand, which would affect the entries for many states. A decision is expected by mid-2027.

Next key date: Oral argument, December 2, 2026

Glock, Inc. v. Griffin and NSSF v. Griffin (convertible pistol sales ban)

Nos. 3:26-cv-01525 and 3:26-cv-01528 · U.S. District Court, District of Connecticut

Status:

Connecticut's Public Act 26-41 targets 'convertible pistols': semi-automatic pistols with a cruciform trigger bar (the cross-shaped part found in Glock-style striker-fired pistols) that can readily be turned into a machine gun with a simple converter. Hammer-fired pistols and pistols with a molded shield tab that can't easily be removed aren't covered. The law makes it a felony to import, advertise or sell convertible pistols made on or after Oct. 1, 2026. Glock, and separately NSSF with a pistol maker and a range, sued. On Sept. 30, 2026 Judge Kari A. Dooley found the ban likely violates the Second Amendment and issued preliminary injunctions (temporary orders) blocking the state's prosecutors and the DESPP commissioner from enforcing it while the cases continue.

What it would change: While the injunctions stand, the state can't enforce the ban on importing, advertising and selling newly made convertible pistols. If the state wins in the end (or on appeal), the ban could take effect. A convertible pistol actually fitted with a converter is still treated as a machine gun.

Next key date: Deadline for Glock to amend its complaint (Glock case scheduling order), November 19, 2026

Alaska Attorney General: state law tied to federal NFA registration

AS 11.61.200 · Alaska Department of Law

Status:

Alaska's prohibited-weapons law links some defenses to federal NFA registration. Since ATF stopped enforcing NFA registration for suppressors, short-barreled rifles and short-barreled shotguns, the state says the law is in flux. The Department of Law asked the next Legislature to clear it up, and until then it has asked police to check with state prosecutors before filing charges under that statute.

What it would change: A legislative fix could spell out how Alaskans can lawfully own these items without federal registration. Until then, the state law itself hasn't changed.

S1800: Retailer disclosures about lost or stolen firearms and straw purchases

S1800 · New Jersey Senate

Status:

This bill would require firearm retailers to tell customers that they're responsible for reporting lost or stolen firearms, and that it's unlawful to buy a firearm intending to sell it to someone who is disqualified.

What it would change: Gun stores in New Jersey would have to give buyers these written disclosures.

P. del S. 1506: Digital weapons license through CESCO Digital

P. del S. 1506 · Senate of Puerto Rico, Commission on Public Safety and Veterans Affairs

Status:

This bill would amend Puerto Rico's weapons law (Ley 168-2019) so license holders can view and verify their weapons license electronically through the CESCO Digital app, much like a driver's license.

What it would change: An electronic version of the weapons license would be recognized as official proof that the license exists and is current.

Bathras v. Moore (challenge to SB 334)

No. 1:26-cv-02074 · U.S. District Court, District of Maryland

Status:

Gun owners and groups sued to stop Maryland's 'machine gun convertible pistol' sales ban before it starts on Jan. 1, 2027. The judge refused to block the law for now, so it's still set to take effect. The lawsuit itself continues.

What it would change: If the challengers eventually win, or an appeals court steps in, the Jan. 1, 2027 sales ban could be blocked.

Next key date: Sales ban scheduled to begin, January 1, 2027

Davenport v. Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs

No. 26-452 · U.S. Supreme Court (cert petition)

Status:

New Jersey is asking the Supreme Court to review the Third Circuit decision that struck down its rifle and magazine bans. Because that decision is on hold, both laws remain enforceable for now.

What it would change: The outcome will decide whether New Jersey's 'assault weapon' ban and 10-round magazine limit survive.

Next key date: Response due, November 4, 2026

Ortega v. Lujan Grisham (7-day waiting period appeal)

No. 26-2170 · U.S. Court of Appeals, 10th Circuit

Status:

After the district court ruled that New Mexico's 7-day waiting period can't be enforced against the two plaintiffs, Samuel Ortega and Rebecca Scott, the Governor and Attorney General appealed to the 10th Circuit. The waiting period still applies to everyone else.

What it would change: If the state wins the appeal, the waiting period could apply to the two plaintiffs again. If the plaintiffs win, the judgment stands, but it still only protects them; the separate NSSF v. Torrez case asks for broader relief.

HB 6285: Eliminating state restrictions on silencers and short-barreled rifles and shotguns

HB 6285 (2026) · Michigan House, Committee on Judiciary

Status:

This bill would remove Michigan's own restrictions on silencers (suppressors) and on short-barreled rifles and shotguns by amending the state penal code and repealing MCL 750.224b. Federal law would still apply.

What it would change: If passed, state-level bans and conditions on these items would be removed from the Michigan penal code.

Interstate Transport and Temporary Export of NFA Firearms

RIN 1140-AA89 · ATF (Federal Register)

Status:

Today, if you own a registered short-barreled rifle, short-barreled shotgun, machine gun or destructive device and want to take it across state lines, you file ATF Form 5320.20 and wait for approval first. ATF has proposed dropping that step for short trips (365 days or fewer). For longer moves, including permanently relocating, you would still send ATF notice but wouldn't have to wait for approval before going. The proposal hasn't been finalized.

What it would change: If finalized, owners of these registered NFA firearms could travel interstate for up to a year without filing and waiting on Form 5320.20, and people moving wouldn't have to wait for approval. Until a final rule is published, the current approval requirement stays in place.

Firearms Transactions and Straw Purchases

RIN 1140-AA78 · ATF (Federal Register)

Status:

ATF proposed changes to its regulations on firearm transactions and straw purchases (buying a gun for someone else who is the real buyer). We haven't summarized the proposal's details here, so read the Federal Register notice for specifics.

What it would change: It would revise ATF's regulations on firearm transactions and straw purchases; see the notice for the exact changes.

Removing the 'stabilizing brace' factoring criteria

RIN 1140-AA98 · ATF (Federal Register)

Status:

ATF has proposed formally removing the 2023 pistol-brace rule's language from its regulations. A court already threw that rule out in 2024, so this would mostly clean up the rulebook. No final rule had been published as of the last check.

What it would change: The brace rule's factoring criteria would be removed from federal regulations. ATF would still judge each firearm under the law's definition of 'rifle'.

Revising the 'engaged in the business' dealer definition

RIN 1140-AB01 · ATF (Federal Register)

Status:

ATF has proposed rescinding parts of its 2024 rule that spelled out when someone selling guns needs a federal dealer's license. The law itself, which makes it a crime to sell firearms repeatedly for profit without a license, hasn't changed.

What it would change: The detailed 2024 guidance on who counts as a dealer would be narrowed. The statute's licensing requirement would stay the same.

Duncan v. Bonta (magazine limit)

No. 25-198 · U.S. Supreme Court (cert petition)

Status:

Challengers asked the Supreme Court to review California's ban on magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. The Court hasn't granted or denied the petition yet.

What it would change: If the Court takes the case and rules against the ban, California's 10-round magazine limit could fall, along with similar limits elsewhere.

Gator's Custom Guns v. Washington

No. 25-153 · U.S. Supreme Court (cert petition)

Status:

A gun store asked the Supreme Court to review Washington's ban on selling, making and importing magazines over 10 rounds. The Court hasn't acted on the petition yet.

What it would change: If the Court takes the case and rules against the law, Washington's magazine limit could fall.

Challenges to SB 749/HB 217 (Crump v. Katz and Santolla v. Katz)

SB 749 / HB 217 (2026) · Virginia circuit courts

Status:

Virginia's 2026 law banning the sale, manufacture, import and transfer of 'assault firearms' and of magazines over 15 rounds is blocked in court. Per news reports, both cases are on hold until the U.S. Supreme Court decides its AR-15 case, with the injunctions left in place.

What it would change: If the injunctions are lifted, the sales ban on covered rifles and 15+ round magazines would take effect.

NAGR v. Lamont

No. 25-421 · U.S. Supreme Court (cert petition)

Status:

Challengers asked the Supreme Court to review Connecticut's gun laws, including its magazine limit. The Court hasn't acted on the petition yet.

What it would change: If granted and decided against the state, Connecticut's restrictions could change.

SB 50: Freedom to Carry NC (permitless carry)

SB 50 (2025-2026 Session) · North Carolina General Assembly

Status:

This bill would allow eligible adults to carry a concealed handgun without a permit. The governor vetoed it, and the Senate voted to override. The House hasn't held its override vote yet.

What it would change: If the House overrides the veto, North Carolina would become a permitless-carry state.

Rhode v. Bonta (ammunition background checks)

No. 24-542 · U.S. Court of Appeals, 9th Circuit (en banc)

Status:

This case challenges California's background-check system for buying ammunition. The full 9th Circuit (not just a three-judge panel) reheard it, and a decision is pending.

What it would change: A ruling could keep or strike down California's ammunition background checks.

Question 9: Firearm regulations referendum (Chapter 135 of the Acts of 2024)

Question 9 · Massachusetts voters

Status:

Massachusetts voters will decide whether to keep the state's 2024 gun law, Chapter 135. A YES vote keeps the law; a NO vote repeals it.

What it would change: A NO majority would repeal Chapter 135, which could change several entries on the Massachusetts page.

Next key date: Election Day, November 3, 2026

Arnold v. Kotek (Measure 114)

S071885 · Oregon Supreme Court

Status:

This case asks whether Measure 114, the voter-approved permit-to-purchase and magazine-limit law, violates the Oregon Constitution's right to bear arms. The Oregon Supreme Court heard argument and hasn't ruled yet.

What it would change: The decision will determine whether Measure 114 can take effect under the state constitution. Separately, HB 4145 delayed the measure to Jan. 1, 2028.

Issue No. 2: Right to Keep and Bear Arms Amendment

SJR 11 of 2025 · Arkansas voters (referred by the General Assembly)

Status:

Arkansas voters will decide whether to rewrite the state constitution's right-to-bear-arms section. The amendment says the right covers common defense, lawful hunting and recreation, and any other lawful purpose; that it includes ammunition, firearm accessories and firearm components; and that it is 'a natural, fundamental, and individual right that shall not be infringed.'

What it would change: If approved, it rewrites Article 2, Section 5 of the Arkansas Constitution, effective Jan. 1, 2027.

Next key date: Election Day, November 3, 2026