Donald Trump played up the contrast between his approach to guns and Kamala Harris for the first time this week.
During his Thursday press conference, Trump attacked Harris and touted his record on guns. That was different from the previous several weeks, which were hallmarked by Trump’s silence on the issue. I try to answer whether that means he’s changing course.
Speaking of changing course, Harris’s VP pick indicates she won’t be moving any further to the middle on guns. Minnesota Governor Tim Walz may have started his career as a pro-gun Democrat, but he’s been in line with the restrictions Harris wants since at least 2018.
Meanwhile, Maryland has been very busy in court this week. A number of the state’s new “gun-free zones” were struck down by a federal judge. But its ban on AR-15s and similar firearms was upheld by an En Banc panel of the Fourth Circuit, potentially setting up a Supreme Court showdown.
A federal judge in New Jersey recently came to the opposite conclusion about that state’s AR ban. But, as Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman explains, he did so in a rather bizarre way.
Plus, we answer your gun politics and policy questions on the podcast! And make sure you check out all the links at the end of the newsletter for a bunch more gun stories.
Trump Hits Harris on Guns, Says Shooting Didn’t Change His View on AR-15s
By Stephen Gutowski
Former President Donald Trump said his position on AR-15s hasn’t changed after a would-be assassin shot him with one and criticized Vice President Kamala Harris’s position on guns during a lengthy press conference.
On Thursday, the Republican nominee spoke about the 2024 campaign to reporters at his Mar-a-Lago resort. For the first time since he was shot, he was asked about whether his view on the rifle used by the attacker had changed and responded, “It didn’t.” He then went on to attack the Democratic nominee by claiming she supports confiscating firearms.
“She wants to take away everyone’s gun,” Trump said. “If you take away guns… can’t do it because people need guns for protection.”
Analysis: Is Trump Pivoting Back to Gun Voters? [Member Exclusive]
By Stephen Gutowski
Former President Donald Trump went after Vice President Kamala Harris on guns while burnishing his own credentials on Thursday.
During a lengthy press conference, Trump painted Harris as radical on guns. He painted himself as a protector of the Second Amendment. Those were his first remarks contrasting his position on gun control with Harris since she took over the top spot on the Democratic ticket a few weeks back.
Does that mean Trump has decided to change tact on gun politics as we barrel closer to November?
If you’re a Reload Member, click here to read more. If not, buy a membership to get exclusive access!
Harris Taps Tim Walz for VP, Doubling Down on Gun Control
By Jake Fogleman
With both tickets now officially set for the Presidential election this November, gun voters will have a stark choice.
On Tuesday, Vice President Kamala Harris (D.) named Minnesota Governor Tim Walz (D.) as her running mate to take on former President Donald Trump (R.) and Ohio Senator JD Vance (R.) in the 2024 election. Walz, a former Congressman turned Governor, has a nearly identical gun platform to one the Harris campaign has recently pivoted to.
“I am proud to announce that I’ve asked Tim Walz to be my running mate,” she announced in a social media post. “As a governor, a coach, a teacher, and a veteran, he’s delivered for working families like his. It’s great to have him on the team.”
Federal Appeals Court Again Upholds Maryland AR-15 Ban
By Stephen Gutowski
The Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has once again found Maryland’s so-called assault weapons ban is constitutional.
In a ten-to-five ruling on Tuesday, a full panel of the appeals court determined the Old Line state’s ban on AR-15s and similar firearms does not violate the Second Amendment. It found the banned guns fall outside the protections guaranteed by the Constitution. Using similar reasoning to the last time the panel ruled on the same law in 2021, the majority decided semi-automatic assault weapons are too similar to military weapons to fall under the Second Amendment.
“The assault weapons at issue fall outside the ambit of protection offered by the Second Amendment because, in essence, they are military-style weapons designed for sustained combat operations that are ill-suited and disproportionate to the need for self-defense,” Judge Harvie Wilkinson wrote for the majority in Bianchi v. Brown. “Moreover, the Maryland law fits comfortably within our nation’s tradition of firearms regulation.”
Click here to continue reading.
Federal Judge Strikes Down Maryland ‘Gun-Free Zones’
By Jake Fogleman
Broadly prohibiting licensed gun-carry across most of Maryland violates the Second Amendment.
That’s according to a new ruling from US District Judge George L. Russell issued Friday. He struck down several, though not all, of the state’s recently adopted location restrictions for licensed gun carriers as unconstitutional and issued a permanent injunction against their enforcement.
“[T]he Court will permanently enjoin Maryland’s laws restricting the carrying of firearms in locations selling alcohol for onsite consumption, private buildings without the owner’s consent, and within 1,000 feet of a public demonstration,” Judge Russell wrote in Kipke v. Moore.
Podcast: We Answer Your Gun Politics Questions
By Stephen Gutowski
This week, we’re answering Reload Members’ questions on the podcast.
So much has happened in the last few weeks. The NRA’s corruption just reached its end stage. Although, there are still some potentially decisive decisions for the judge to make. The Democrats just swapped out Joe Biden for Kamala Harris. Then Harris’s campaign walked back her most aggressive gun policy position.
Contributing Writer Jake Fogleman and I got several questions on those fronts. Plus, a few on my time as a CNN contributor. We did our best to answer as many as we could.
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.
Contributing writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss the legal consequences the NRA could face now that the remedies phase of its trial has all but concluded. We also cover Kamala Harris’ latest flip flop on AR-15 confiscation as well as a federal judge’s recent decision to strike down New Jersey’s ban on the very same weapons. Finally, we discuss big new election spending pledges from the nation’s largest gun control groups.
Analysis: A New Twist in Hardware Ban Litigation [Member Exclusive]
By Jake Fogleman
Can AR-15s be “commonly used” arms afforded protection by the Second Amendment while the magazines that usually come with them are not? At least one federal judge seems to think so.
Last Tuesday, US District Judge Peter Sheridan struck down New Jersey’s ban on AR-15s (and only AR-15s) as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. At the same time, he ruled that the state’s related prohibition on ammunition magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds was on solid legal footing.
“The AR-15 Provision of the Assault Firearms Law is unconstitutional under Bruen and Heller as to the Colt AR-15 for use of self-defense within the home,” Judge Sheridan wrote in Cheeseman v. Platkin. “In contrast, the LCM Amendment is constitutional under these same decisions.”
Even among the disparate outcomes reached by judges grappling with the Supreme Court’s new Second Amendment test over the last two years, Judge Sheridan’s reasoning stands out. Most lower courts evaluating “assault weapon” and magazine bans to this point have treated them as nearly one and the same—either by striking each down or, more commonly, upholding both. Judge Sheridan’s treatment of New Jersey’s similar bans uniquely splits the difference.
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
US judge tosses much of Mexico’s lawsuit against US gun makers | Reuters | By Nate Raymond
Gun Deaths Fell in 2023 — Except Among Kids | The Trace | By Chip Brownlee and Jennifer Mascia
Eighth Circuit Reaffirms Felon-in-Possession Ban in Case Sent Back By SCOTUS
En Banc Fourth Circuit Upholds Federal Law Against Firearms with Obliterated Serial Numbers
Third Circuit Upholds Felon-in-Possession Ban in As Applied Challenge
Eleventh Circuit Upholds Felon-in-Possession Ban
That’s it for this week in guns.
I’ll see you all next week.
Thanks,
Stephen Gutowski
Founder
The Reload
