In a first-of-its-kind move, the U.S. Department of Justice has officially filed a lawsuit challenging a ban on commonly owned semi-automatic firearms, including AR-15–style rifles. This marks a historic shift in federal legal strategy and a major development for the Second Amendment.

The lawsuit, United States of America v. District of Columbia, directly challenges Washington, D.C.’s so-called “assault weapon” ban. According to the DOJ, these firearms are protected by the plain text of the Second Amendment and long-standing Supreme Court precedent, including District of Columbia v. Heller.

For the first time, the Department of Justice has taken the official position that bans on firearms in common use for lawful purposes are unconstitutional. The DOJ argues that D.C.’s law violates both the Constitution and Supreme Court rulings that explicitly prohibit banning commonly owned arms.

This lawsuit was filed by the DOJ’s newly created Second Amendment Section within the Civil Rights Division—an office designed to target constitutional infringements nationwide.

This case is significant for several reasons:

• The AR-15 is the most popular semi-automatic rifle in America, clearly meeting the “common use” standard.
• A favorable ruling could create a circuit split, increasing the likelihood of Supreme Court review.
• It represents a dramatic shift from past DOJ positions that often defended restrictive gun laws.

Attorney General Pam Bondi stated that living in the nation’s capital should not strip law-abiding citizens of their fundamental right to keep and bear arms—a principle that could have nationwide implications.

While skepticism toward the DOJ remains warranted, this action deserves recognition. The federal government is now affirmatively defending the Second Amendment in court, something that has not happened before at this level.

This case could be a major turning point—and one worth watching closely.