President Donald Trump made his first step toward changing the federal government’s approach to gun policy. Well, maybe more like a half-step.
I take a dive into what his executive order on guns actually says and what might result from it in a piece for members.
Outside of the White House, the courts have been busy with guns this week. The Tenth Circuit upheld a woman’s lifetime gun ban for writing a bad check decades ago, even after the Supreme Court asked them to reconsider. A federal judge in Hawaii upheld the state’s under-21 gun ban. However, an Illinois state judge tossed out its permit-to-purchase law for the third time. Contributing Writer Jake Foglmen also takes a look at a Fifth Circuit ruling to explain why the courts aren’t necessarily the best path for gun-rights advocates in their fight to deregulate silencers.
Plus, David Blanton of The Humble Marksman joins the podcast to discuss the gun industry trends he saw at SHOT Show 2025! We also have a lot of fascinating stories, including one on the changing face of gun ownership, down in the links. Oh, and the Birds won the Super Bowl! So, I’m headed up to the parade this morning. Drop me a line if you’re going to be there, too!
Trump Orders Review of Federal Gun Policy
By Stephen Gutowski
President Donald Trump has directed his administration to look for and potentially undo federal regulations that may violate the Second Amendment.
On Friday, Trump issued a new executive order requiring newly confirmed Attorney General Pam Bondi to dig through agency rules and policies, looking for any that might improperly restrict gun rights. He put a particular emphasis on agency rules implementing new gun restrictions during the Biden Administration, such as those added by the ATF. He gave Bondi a month to complete the review and left it to her to figure out the details of which policies to roll back and how to do so.
“Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Attorney General shall examine all orders, regulations, guidance, plans, international agreements, and other actions of executive departments and agencies (agencies) to assess any ongoing infringements of the Second Amendment rights of our citizens, and present a proposed plan of action to the President, through the Domestic Policy Advisor, to protect the Second Amendment rights of all Americans,” the order said.
Analysis: What Trump’s Gun Executive Order Could Do [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski
President Donald Trump has made his first move on gun policy.
Last Friday, he issued an executive order directing Attorney General Pam Bondi to undertake a 30-day review of executive branch gun actions and positions to ensure they don’t violate the Second Amendment. The order itself doesn’t tell Bondi what specific actions to take. However, it does outline a number of areas to focus her review on.
So, what might come at the end of those 30 days? Let’s break it down section by section.
If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access!
AD: The Dispatch is For The Silent Majority of Self-Directed Thinkers
Tired of partisan media cheerleading for one team? Get the news without the drama when you join The Dispatch.
Jonah Goldberg and Steve Hayes launched The Dispatch in 2019 to build an enduring presence on the center-right for original reporting and thoughtful analysis. No insulting clickbait, no false outrage, no annoying auto-play videos—just reliable journalism that prioritizes context, depth, and understanding.
Join half a million loyal readers and start reading The Dispatch today.
Reload readers: Claim your exclusive 30-day, all-access FREE trial today.
Tenth Circuit Upholds Gun Ban for Bad Check Despite SCOTUS Ordering Reconsideration
By Jake Fogleman
Writing one bad check for less than $500 is grounds for permanent disarmament, a federal appeals court has ruled.
On Tuesday, a unanimous three-judge panel for the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals once again ruled against Melynda Vincent, a Utah single mother who sought to restore her gun rights despite a 17-year-old conviction for bank fraud. It previously ruled against Vincent but was tasked by the Supreme Court with reconsidering the case in light of its most recent Second Amendment decision in US v. Rahimi. The panel said the High Court’s guidance failed to change the outcome.
“Given this remand, we’ve freshly considered the Second Amendment claim and conclude that Rahimi doesn’t undermine the panel’s earlier reasoning or result,” Judge Robert E. Bacharach wrote in Vincent v. Bondi.
Click here to continue reading.
Federal Judge Upholds Hawaii Under 21 Gun Ban
By Stephen Gutowski
The Aloha State can continue to restrict 18-to-20-year-olds from owning guns–at least, for now.
On Friday, that was the conclusion a federal judge reached. US District Court Judge Jill Otake rejected a request from young Hawaiians, gun stores, and the Second Amendment Foundation to block enforcement of the state’s ban on selling or transferring guns to those under 21. She ruled the plaintiffs didn’t meet the high burden needed to win an early-stage injunction but cautioned that doesn’t necessarily mean they couldn’t get there eventually.
“In sum, the Court denies the Motion for Preliminary Injunction and maintains the status quo,” Judge Otake wrote in Pinales v. Lopez. “In doing so, the Court stresses the preliminary nature of the instant ruling, which does not represent a definitive conclusion on the constitutionality of the State’s statutory scheme.”
Illinois Judge Tosses Gun Purchase Permit
By Jake Fogleman
Requiring a permit to exercise Second Amendment rights within the home is unconstitutional.
That’s according to Illinois Circuit Court judge T. Scott Webb. On Monday, Webb struck down the state’s requirement that citizens have a Firearm Owner Identification (FOID) card to own a gun in an Illinois woman’s challenge to charges of possessing a .22 caliber rifle without a permit.
“After analyzing all the evidence in this matter, this Court finds that the Defendant’s activity of possessing a firearm within the confines of her home is an act protected by the Second Amendment,” Judge Webb wrote in People of the State of Illinois vs. Vivian Claudine Brown. “Additionally, there are no historical analogues to the FOID Act as required in Bruen. Finally, the Court finds that any fee associated with exercising the core fundamental Constitutional right of armed self-defense within the confines of one’s home violates the Second Amendment.”
Podcast: Gun Industry Trends at SHOT Show 2025 (Ft. The Humble Marksman)
By Stephen Gutowski
The gun industry just finished up its trade show in Las Vegas, Nevada. Even though I was in the Philippines with my fiance during the show this year, I wanted to make sure we all stayed updated on the big storylines of SHOT Show 2025.
So, I invited one of the best gun reviewers out there to come on the show and give us his view from the floor. David Blanton is a competitive shooter turned gun reviewer who runs The Humble Marksman YouTube channel.
You can listen to the show on your favorite podcasting app or by clicking here. Video of the episode is available on our YouTube channel.
Plus, Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss David Hogg’s election for a Democratic Party leadership position and what it says about the party’s approach to gun politics. We also talk about Trump’s attorney general nominee Pam Bondi getting confirmed despite concerns raised by gun rights groups and unpack one of her first actions with regard to the ATF. Finally, we break down a recent ruling from a district judge who struck down the federal machine gun ban for violating the Second Amendment.
Analysis: Fifth Circuit Ruling Highlights Why Courts Aren’t the Best Bet for Silence Reform [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals just decided whether the Second Amendment protects silencers.
It didn’t go the way gun-rights advocates hoped. On Thursday, a three-judge panel upheld the conviction of a Louisiana Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) for possessing an unregistered silencer, more accurately called a sound suppressor, in violation of the National Firearms Act (NFA). The panel determined suppressors do not count as “arms” under the Second Amendment.
“The use of a suppressor, as we noted above, is not necessary to the use of a firearm, so it is not protected by the plain text of the Second Amendment,” Chief Judge Jennifer Walker Elrod wrote in US v. Peterson. “The Second Amendment, therefore, is not offended by the NFA regulation, so we AFFIRM the district court’s denial of Peterson’s motion to dismiss.”
If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership for exclusive access to this and hundreds of other stories!
Outside The Reload
Guns are not just for conservative white men | The Hill | By David Yamane
Baltimore sues Glock over illegal machinegun conversions | AP News | By Lea Skene
That’s it for this week in guns.
I’ll see you all next week.
Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload
