02/13/2026

Breaking news from the U.S. Supreme Court could dramatically reshape the Second Amendment landscape nationwide. Four major gun rights cases are now scheduled for the same Supreme Court conference date, raising hopes that the justices may finally take up the issue of magazine bans and semi-automatic firearm restrictions.

The cases set for consideration include:

  • Duncan v. Bonta – A high-profile challenge to California’s magazine capacity ban.
  • NAGR v. Lamont – A case challenging both magazine and semi-auto restrictions in Connecticut.
  • Gator’s Custom Guns v. Washington – Targeting Washington State’s magazine ban.
  • Viramontes v. Cook County – Addressing semi-automatic firearm restrictions in Illinois.

These cases represent some of the most significant constitutional challenges to state-level firearm bans in years. At issue are laws that restrict magazine capacity and ban certain semi-automatic firearms—regulations that critics argue violate the Second Amendment under the Supreme Court’s text-and-history framework established in Bruen.

For Californians especially, the stakes are high. If the Court declines to hear Duncan v. Bonta, the Ninth Circuit’s ruling upholding California’s magazine ban would remain in place, potentially impacting not only California but other western states within the Ninth Circuit’s jurisdiction.

There is cautious optimism among Second Amendment advocates. In prior statements, Justice Brett Kavanaugh suggested the Court may address so-called “AR-15 issues” in the near future. Meanwhile, Justice Clarence Thomas has previously questioned how commonly owned semi-automatic rifles could fall outside constitutional protections.

If the Supreme Court grants certiorari in even one of these cases, it could set the stage for a nationwide ruling on magazine capacity limits and semi-automatic firearm bans—issues that have divided lower courts across the country.

The official decision may appear in the Court’s upcoming orders list following the conference. For gun owners, constitutional scholars, and policymakers alike, the coming days could mark a pivotal turning point in modern Second Amendment jurisprudence.