The next major Second Amendment fight may soon be on the Supreme Court’s doorstep.
On Monday, 26 Republican attorneys general, joined by the Arizona state legislature, filed a brief urging SCOTUS to strike down Washington State’s ban on so-called “large capacity magazines.” The case, Gator’s Custom Guns, Inc. v. Washington, could determine whether Americans nationwide retain the right to own magazines that hold more than ten rounds—what the brief calls “plus-ten magazines.”
The stakes are enormous. Washington’s ban was first overturned by a lower court, then reinstated by the Washington Supreme Court. Now, the challengers are asking the U.S. Supreme Court to take up the case and decide once and for all whether restricting magazines amounts to restricting arms themselves.
The coalition of attorneys general—from Montana, Idaho, Texas, Florida, and 23 other states—was blunt: “The right [to keep and bear arms] includes the right to possess and use essential components of modern arms like plus-ten magazines. Amici urge this Court to grant certiorari and reverse.”
Their argument rests on the Supreme Court’s own test in Bruen (2022), which requires gun restrictions to align with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Washington, they argue, failed that test.
Montana AG Austin Knudsen minced no words in his comments to Breitbart: “Lower courts, including the Washington Supreme Court, are attempting to attack and rewrite the Second Amendment. Law-abiding citizens should not be treated like criminals for exercising their right to keep and bear arms for self-defense.”
Idaho AG Raúl Labrador was just as forceful, warning that the logic used to uphold Washington’s ban could be applied to gut the Second Amendment entirely: “California and Washington courts are attempting to rewrite the Second Amendment by claiming the Constitution doesn’t protect firearm magazines at all. These rulings would let anti-gun states ban virtually any firearm component by declaring the Constitution irrelevant.”
That’s the heart of the matter. If a state can declare that a magazine—a part necessary to make most modern firearms function—isn’t covered by the Second Amendment, then nothing stops them from carving away at other components until the right itself is hollowed out. Today it’s magazines. Tomorrow it’s semi-automatic actions. Eventually, the only weapons left would be those so antiquated they’re irrelevant for real-world self-defense.
The attorneys general also reminded the Court that so-called “large capacity magazines” are not exotic military gear but common, standard-issue equipment. Millions of law-abiding Americans own them, and they are in regular use for sport, home defense, and personal safety. The brief argues that this long, established history makes them precisely the kind of arms the Second Amendment was designed to protect.
