We’ve made it to November, and now we’ll see what American voters decide about the future of our government.
Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman has a guide to which races the gun groups have focused on. Those will be the key ones to watch to get the best understanding of what the major gun policy takeaways from this election will be. There is plenty of overlap between the gun-rights and gun-control groups in where they’ve spent their money, but they also diverge in a number of significant ways.
Plus, Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey joins the podcast to discuss the gun money race. And Kamala Harris goes after Donald Trump’s 2022 comments on “terminating” Constitutional rules, connecting it to the Second Amendment.
We also saw another Second Amendment ruling out of a federal appeals court this week. A panel on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the city’s magazine ban. As I explain for Reload Members, it did so somewhat surprisingly after first finding the magazines were “arms” that are “in common use.” And another lower court reconsidered its Second Amendment ruling in light of Rahimi, deciding the High Court ruling made no difference.
Don’t forget: we have several more interesting gun stories down in the links and The Dispatch is offering a free month of its membership to Reload readers!
The Races to Watch on Election Night, According to Gun Group Spending
By Jake Fogleman
The national gun-control groups have consistently outraised gun-rights groups like the NRA and its allies this cycle, but groups on both sides have ramped up their election spending substantially in recent weeks.
With just days to go until polls close, here’s a look at which races and candidates the major gun groups have invested most of their money.
National Rifle Association
Unlike in past elections, the NRA has relied entirely on its PAC to raise and spend money in the 2024 election. The group’s SuperPAC, the NRA Victory Fund, has not been employed for any outside spending despite the group using it to invest $19,452,528 in the last presidential race. The NRA Political Victory Fund (PVF), meanwhile, has reported $10,156,191 in outside spending as of Thursday, according to Federal Election Commission data compiled by OpenSecrets.
Federal Appeals Court Upholds DC Magazine Ban
By Jake Fogleman
Gun owners in the nation’s capital will continue to face ammunition magazine capacity limits, a federal appeals court ruled Tuesday.
A divided three-judge panel for the DC Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a lower court decision upholding DC’s ban on the possession and sale of what it called “extra-large capacity magazines” (ELCMs). The panel ruled the city’s ten-round limit for magazines fit within the nation’s historical tradition of regulating “particularly dangerous weapons” and those “capable of unprecedented lethality,” even though there weren’t similar bans when the Second Amendment was ratified.
“Because ELCMs implicate unprecedented societal concerns and dramatic technological changes, the lack of a ‘precise match’ does not preclude finding at this preliminary juncture an historical tradition ‘analogous enough to pass constitutional muster,’” the majority wrote in an unsigned opinion in Hanson v. District of Columbia. “Therefore, we hold Hanson is not sufficiently likely to succeed on the merits of his claim to warrant the entry of a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the magazine cap.”
Click here to continue reading.
Analysis: Can an ‘Arm’ in ‘Common Use’ be Banned Under the Second Amendment? [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski
The answer is yes, at least according to one federal appeals court.
On Tuesday, a panel on the DC Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the capital city’s ban on magazines that hold more than ten rounds of ammunition. It did so despite finding the magazines were “arms” and they were in “common use” for self-defense, which puts them squarely inside the scope of the Second Amendment’s protections. It even rejected most of the historical analogues offered up by DC to justify its ban.
So, how did the panel still reach the same conclusion as other federal judges who haven’t gone half that far? And what are the implications and weaknesses of its ruling?
If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read the rest. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access!
AD: The Dispatch. No outrage. Just facts.
Sick of the half-truths and partisan spin this election cycle? Get past the bluster and get back to the facts by joining 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. As we rush towards Election Day, these values matter more than ever.
Join 400,000+ loyal readers and start reading The Dispatch today.
The Reload readers: Claim your exclusive 30-day, all-access FREE trial today.
Harris Says She Won’t Take Away Guns, Attacks Trump for Calling to ‘Terminate’ Constitution
By Stephen Gutowski
Vice President Kamala Harris said she supports the Second Amendment and attacked Former President Donald Trump’s 2022 comments on “termination” of Constitutional rules during an interview posted on Monday.
Harris joined NFL Hall of Famer Shannon Sharp on his podcast Club Shay Shay for a wide-ranging interview. When asked why she thought some Black men support Trump, Harris pivoted to a broader question of his viability as a candidate. She argued she supports the Constitution, including the Second Amendment, while Trump has said its rules should be undone.
“The question for everybody: should he be president of the United States, right? That’s the question,” Harris said. “Should he have the ability to sit behind the Seal of the President of the United States when he says he wants to terminate the Constitution of the United States? You know what that would mean? In the Constitution of the United States is your Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizure, your Fifth Amendment right, your Sixth Amendment right to an attorney.”
Podcast: Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey on the Gun Money Race as the Finish Line Approaches
By Stephen Gutowski
This week, we’re discussing the final fundraising numbers we’re going to see from the gun groups ahead of the election.
To do that, we’ve got Hot Air’s Ed Morrissey back on the show. He said he isn’t surprised to see the gun-control groups outraising the NRA and its allies. He argued it would probably take several more cycles for former NRA donors to be comfortable enough to give to the movement again.
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 cover a pair of resurfaced clips from Kamala Harris’ tenure as San Francisco DA that show her taking a more pragmatic view of the Second Amendment and school security policy. We also discuss how party control of the House of Representatives next year could come down to a race in Maine where an incumbent Democrat’s new support for an assault weapon ban could cost him his seat. We finish the show with a round-up of stories dealing with an investigation into gunmakers sharing gun owners’ private data with political operatives, a Democratic Senate candidate’s range day campaign event going awry, and how the Second Circuit has again ruled on New York’s concealed carry restrictions.
Analysis: Rahimi Makes Zero Impact… Again [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski
The Supreme Court keeps remanding Second Amendment cases for reconsideration under Rahimi, and the lower courts keep sending them back unchanged. What is going on?
On Thursday, a Second Circuit panel became the third appeals court to revisit a gun case the High Court granted, vacated, and remanded (GVR). They were also the third to return with the same decision as before. Rahimi didn’t change a thing in any of them.
In Antonyuk v. James, the panel unanimously reaffirmed themselves.
“Having reconsidered the prior decision in light of Rahimi, and the parties’ supplemental briefing regarding the effect of that decision on our reasoning in this case, we now issue a revised opinion in Antonyuk,” the panel wrote. “We reach the same conclusions that we reached in our prior consolidated opinion.”
In late August, an Eighth Circuit panel did the same.
If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read more. If not, buy a membership today for exclusive access to this piece and hundreds of others!
Outside The Reload
Oregon appeals court hears oral arguments on gun control ballot measure | OPB | By Conrad Wilson
Golden’s Support For ‘Assault Weapon’ Ban Could Cost Him House Seat | Bearing Arms | By Cam Edwards
New Zealand Government Punishes Gun Owners for Their Political Beliefs | Reason | By JD Tuccille
That’s it for this week in guns.
I’ll see you all next week.
Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload
