Feed aggregator

House Bill H8073 is scheduled for a House Judiciary Committee hearing today at 4:00 PM.

In 2025, the state passed a law focused on stopping future sales and transfers of certain firearms. H8073 goes much further by targeting possession itself, meaning firearms that were previously owned legally could now become illegal to own.

The bill only extends the previous grandfather policy through the end of 2026. After that, owners would be forced to sell their property through a dealer, remove it from the state, or face felony charges.

This is not about public safety. It is about forcing compliance by threatening otherwise law abiding citizens with criminal penalties for keeping what they already own.

Lawmakers are moving quickly, and this hearing today is a critical moment.

This is an unacceptable step towards unconstitutional gun confiscation, and it must be stopped.

Contact the committee members today and demand they vote NO on H8073.

IMPORTANT UPDATE: President Trump has fired Attorney General Pam Bondi. 

Gun owners across America are breathing a sigh of relief.

Bondi came in with a weak 2A record and made things worse as attorney general. Under her watch, two Biden-era gun rules Trump promised to kill on day one are still on the books: the pistol brace ban and Biden’s universal background check rule.

She never completed the Second Amendment report that the President ordered. And her DOJ bragged to Congress about the ATF, the same agency that spent four years targeting gun owners.

Now Trump has the chance to get it right. The next attorney general can end enforcement of every Biden-era ATF rule, settle pro-gun litigation with binding commitments, and stop defending unconstitutional gun laws in court.

Tell President Trump: Appoint a pro-2A attorney general who will finish what you started.

Don’t let this moment pass. The Biden-era gun rules are still on the books. The ATF is still open. The fight isn’t over.

With your help, we can ensure a pro-2A champion is our country’s next attorney general.

LAS VEGAS, NV — April 3, 2026 — Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) today launched the 2026 FPC State Freedom Index—the most principled, transparent, and unapologetic scorecard of gun rights in America. With the Index, which shows the state of the law of the 50 states and Washington, D.C. as of the end of 2025, gun owners now have a single, clear tool to see exactly how their state is failing them—and the ammunition to demand their elected officials fix it. Gun owners and policymakers can visit fpcfreedomindex.org to explore the interactive map, compare states, and find out which laws need to be repealed.

New York Withdraws Unconstitutional Social Media Background Check for Firearm Carry; GOA, GOF Secure Major Legal Victory

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

March 31, 2026

Springfield, VA — Gun Owners of America (GOA) and Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) announce a significant legal victory in the ongoing battle against New York’s restrictive and misnamed “Concealed Carry Improvement Act.” In a Stipulation of Partial Settlement filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of New York, State Defendants have officially consented to an injunction against the enforcement of N.Y. Penal Law § 400.00(1)(o)(iv).

This now-enjoined provision required applicants for a concealed carry license to submit a list of their former and current social media accounts from the past three years to confirm their “character and conduct.”

Key Takeaways from the Settlement:

• State Defendants have consented to the entry of a permanent injunction against their enforcement of the social media requirement.
• The Superintendent of the New York State Police is now explicitly required to ensure that the PPB-3 license application form does not include language requiring social media information.
• The remainder of the ongoing litigation will continue to target other statutory provisions, including N.Y. Penal Law § 265.01-d and various “sensitive locations” enumerated in N.Y. Penal Law § 265.01-e where the public carry of firearms for self-defense in prohibited, such as public parks, zoos, and places licensed for alcohol consumption.

The lawsuit, Antonyuk v. James, No. 1:22-cv-986-GTS-PJE (N.D.N.Y.), represents a broader, ongoing constitutional challenge to New York’s aggressive and unconstitutional post-Bruen gun control regime. By forcing the state to abandon its invasive social media check, GOA and GOF have secured a crucial win for both the Second Amendment and the privacy rights of New Yorkers.

Erich Pratt, Senior Vice President of Gun Owners of America, issued the following statement:

“New York’s ‘Concealed Carry Improvement Act’ is a smokescreen. This law has never been about improving concealed carry for law-abiding citizens but instead is a calculated effort to disarm as many New Yorkers as possible. We will continue fighting this unconstitutional law in court, including New York’s onerous location restrictions.”

John Velleco, Executive Vice President of Gun Owners Foundation, issued the following statement:

“New York’s demand that applicants surrender three years of their private social media history was a blatant invasion of privacy and a massive government overreach. Forcing the state to abandon this requirement is a victory not only for the Second Amendment, but for the First and Fourth Amendments as well. The government has absolutely no constitutional authority to rummage through a citizen’s digital life as a prerequisite for exercising their right to armed self-defense.”

GOA spokesmen are available for interviews. Gun Owners of America is a nonprofit grassroots lobbying organization dedicated to protecting the right to keep and bear arms without compromise. GOA represents over two million members and activists. For more information, visit GOA’s Press Center.

-GOA-

Despite many phone calls and emails with strong concerns from grassroots activists, Tennessee lawmakers have pushed HB 1971 through the House Judiciary Committee.

This dangerous bill is now heading to the full House for a vote TODAY at 2:00 P.M. Central.

HB 1971 would dismantle a critical legal safeguard by making it far more difficult for Tennesseans to challenge unconstitutional laws, including unconstitutional gun laws, before they are enforced.

Under current law, citizens can go to court to stop unconstitutional statutes before facing arrest or prosecution. HB 1971 strips that protection and forces you to risk becoming a criminal just to have your day in court.

That means if an unconstitutional gun control law is passed, you may have to violate it first, face charges, and then fight it in court afterward.

This is not how constitutional rights are supposed to work.

Lawmakers should not be shielding unconstitutional laws from timely judicial review, especially when fundamental rights like the Second Amendment are at stake.

HB 1971 creates a chilling effect on your ability to defend your rights and gives the government a dangerous advantage.

TAKE ACTION

Contact your Tennessee State Representative and demand a NO vote on HB 1971.

Tell them:

• You oppose any effort to block or delay challenges to unconstitutional laws
• Tennesseans should not have to risk arrest to defend their rights
• HB 1971 undermines constitutional protections and must be rejected

Make your voice heard as soon as you can, then share this alert with friends and family across Tennessee.

This bill has already cleared committee, and the next vote could very well happen today. Don’t wait until it’s too late!

What: Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) filed a motion for summary judgment in Heeter v. James, its lawsuit challenging New York’s unconstitutional body armor ban.

What: Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) filed a new federal lawsuit, Zimmerman v. Bondi, challenging the federal laws and regulations banning firearms in facilities and other areas within national parks. FPC is seeking a permanent injunction against the enforcement of the carry bans as well as other relief.

End the DOJ’s rogue pistol brace crackdown

A federal court vacated the Biden pistol brace ban. President Trump campaigned on ending it. Bondi’s DOJ is still enforcing it anyway.

On March 16th, 2026, the Department of Justice dropped a bombshell in our ongoing lawsuit, Texas et al. v. ATF:

The ATF “continue[s] to enforce the NFA’s and the GCA’s regulation of short-barreled rifles against some brace-equipped pistols, even though the Rule has been universally vacated.”

Translation: DOJ lawyers are defying a federal court and making a mockery of President Trump’s campaign promises to gun owners.

This matters because ATF has refused to issue classification letters telling owners which pistol braces are legal, unless it’s in a criminal case. That means every single gun owner with a pistol brace is a potential target for felony charges.

President Trump promised twice on the campaign trail to end the pistol brace ban on day one. He said it in Indianapolis in 2023. He said it again in Harrisburg in 2024. His own DOJ is now proving those promises were never kept.

Send your pre-written letter to Congress NOW and demand they hold the DOJ accountable.

GOA has gone directly to senior DOJ officials. We’ve raised your concerns. We’ve received no indication that the ATF plans to reverse course.

Congress must act. Your Representatives and Senators need to hear from you today.

The NFA doesn’t even impose a tax on short-barreled firearms anymore. There is absolutely no justification for ATF bureaucrats to threaten law-abiding gun owners over barrel length.

GOA is fighting this in federal court. pursuing a permanent injunction to end ATF’s rogue enforcement. But Washington only listens when constituents demand action.

Tell Congress: Force the DOJ to stand down and protect every pistol brace owner.

Don’t let the DOJ turn you into a criminal for exercising your Second Amendment rights.

 

Recently, three strong Second Amendment bills passed the Wyoming Legislature and were sent to Gov. Gordon’s Desk. Two of these bills became law while the third bill was vetoed.

The two bills that became law lowered the minimum age to 18 for concealed carry permits (HB0096) and increased protections against Red Flag Gun Confiscation Orders (HB0098) by making state and local enforcement of these orders a crime in Wyoming.

With these two bills, Wyoming returned rights to young adults and increased protections against the extreme Constitutional violations that are inherent with Red Flag Gun Confiscation Orders.

These were huge wins for Second Amendment Rights that should not be forgotten in the wake of the veto of the Second Amendment Protection Act Amendments (SAPA, SF0101).

When Gov. Mark Gordon vetoed SAPA, which would have added a civil process to Wyoming’s existing criminal Second Amendment Protection laws that GOA helped pass in 2022, both he and some in the law enforcement community misrepresented many aspects of the actual bill text.

With this opinion, I want to address some of the worst mischaracterizations from the governor’s veto letter

SAPA MYTH VERSUS REALITY

1) The “Cartel” and “Smuggling” Fallacy — Governor Gordon suggested that updating SAPA would have hindered prosecutions of “violent crime,” “cartel activity,” and “cross-border smuggling.” This is categorically false. As the legislation was written, all protections applied “SOLELY” to federal actions regarding firearms enforced against “LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS.”

The bill explicitly defined “law-abiding” citizen as a person not prohibited under Wyoming law from possessing a firearm, and it did not protect any person not lawfully present in the United States. The Bill placed zero restrictions on the ability of state and local authorities to collaborate in federal actions related to illegals and violent crime.

2) The “Criminals Will Get Away with Crime” Fallacy — By conflating crime and terrorism with the activities of law-abiding Wyoming citizens, the Governor and federal agencies engaged in fearmongering rather than an honest reading of the law.

The Bill was targeted in scope, by protecting only law-abiding citizens, and it specifically allowed the enforcement of all Wyoming laws and any federal law not specifically targeted at firearms (i.e., drug enforcement or immigration enforcement would still be allowed).

3) Correcting the “Printz v. United States” Court Ruling Fallacy — The Governor cited Printz v. United States as a reason the bill was “unnecessary.” This was a major legal error.

Read more at Cowboy State Daily

FORT WORTH, TX (March 24, 2026) – Judge Pittman's misguided opinion upholding Texas's carry ban across wide swaths of public life-including at sporting events-isn't even in the same ballpark as the Constitution. His decision is nothing but foul balls, so we've directed our attorneys to appeal this case to the Fifth Circuit without delay. We're confident the law and the Supreme Court's binding precedent will prevail-and this insane ruling will be reversed.

Virginia voters are being asked to approve a constitutional amendment on April 21 that would allow politicians in Richmond to redraw congressional districts outside of the normal 10-year cycle.

Right now, districts are drawn once per decade by the Virginia Redistricting Commission.

This proposal would give the General Assembly the ability to step in mid-decade and redraw maps if another state does the same.

From a gun owners perspective, this is a serious problem.

The same politicians pushing aggressive gun control would gain more control over how districts are drawn. That means fewer fair and competitive elections, and fewer opportunities to push back on anti-2A legislation.

Virginia has already seen a steady stream of gun control proposals this legislative session. Locking in a political advantage through redistricting makes it much harder to stop or reverse those efforts.

Virginia has already seen a steady stream of gun control proposals this legislative session. Locking in a political advantage through redistricting makes it much harder to stop or reverse those efforts.

Similar efforts in states like California have shown how redistricting can be used to protect political power and limit real voter choice by gerrymandering away strong districts that vote for freedom when it comes to our gun rights.

If politicians can redraw districts whenever it benefits them, they can insulate themselves from voters who oppose their policies, including gun owners.

Do your part during this April 21 referendum.

Vote NO on the redistricting amendment.

Show up and vote, and make sure that your voice is heard.

Don’t wait until it’s too late. Use the button below to register to vote, check your registration status, find your polling place, or apply to vote absentee by mail.

VA VOTER PORTAL

The Commonwealth of Virginia, once the cradle of American liberty and the home of the Bill of Rights, is witnessing a historic betrayal in real time.

On March 14, the Virginia General Assembly wrapped up their 2026 legislative session and rammed through over 15 pieces of anti-gun legislation. In just 60 days, the anti-gun left has nearly undone gun rights for millions of law-abiding Virginia residents.

Their crown jewel of tyranny? SB 749 and HB 217, two so-called “assault weapons” ban bills.

These identical bills landed at the desk of newly elected Democrat Gov. Abigail Spanberger during the final days of the legislative session and are currently awaiting her signature.

She has promised to sign them into law.

For years, Gun Owners of America (GOA) and our dedicated members have stood against these unconstitutional infringements as they’ve popped up in state legislatures all around the country.

Just a few weeks ago, through overwhelming grassroots activism and pressure from gun rights organizations like GOA, a similar “assault weapons” ban was defeated in New Mexico. And last year in Virginia, former Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin vetoed over 27 anti-gun bills – including an “assault weapons” ban.

But with the election of billionaire Michael Bloomberg-backed Spanberger in November 2025, the governor’s seat is now occupied by a rubber stamp for the radical gun control lobby. Anti-gun Democrats also flipped over a dozen pro-gun seats in the Virginia House of Delegates while also maintaining a slim majority in the Virginia Senate.

And within hours of gaining control of the governor’s mansion and legislature, anti-gun lawmakers began drafting numerous gun control measures, promising to ram them through the General Assembly at warp speed.

Make no mistake: SB 749/HB 217 have nothing to do with “safety” and everything to do with removing your Second Amendment rights. This legislation targets the most popular firearms in America — tools used by millions of law-abiding citizens for self-defense, competition and sport. According to the FBI, nearly twice as many people are murdered with hands/fists than rifles of any kind. And over three times as many with knives. Yet anti-gun radicals want us to believe semi-automatic firearms must be banned.

But by arbitrarily labeling semi-automatic rifles, pistols and shotguns as “assault firearms” based on common features like folding stocks or threaded barrels, the anti-gunners are actively removing your ability to defend yourself and your family with the tool of your choice.

Furthermore, the legislation takes aim at standard-capacity magazines, labeling anything over 15 rounds as a “large capacity ammunition feeding device.”

Read more at Fox News

What: Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) filed a new federal lawsuit, Goldberger v. James, challenging New York’s "sensitive location" handgun carry ban in the Times Square area. FPC is seeking a permanent injunction against the enforcement of the carry ban as well as other relief.

Recently, 3 strong GOA-backed Second Amendment bills passed the Wyoming Legislature and were sent to Governor Gordon’s Desk. Two became law while a third bill was vetoed.

The two bills that became law lowered the minimum age to 18 for concealed carry permits (HB0096) and increased protections against Red Flag Gun Confiscation Orders (HB0098) by making state and local enforcement of these orders a crime in Wyoming.

With these two bills, we were able to return Rights to young adults and increase protections against the extreme Constitutional violations that are inherent with Red Flag Gun Confiscation Orders.

These were huge wins for our Second Amendment Rights that should not be forgotten in the wake of the veto of our Second Amendment Protection Act Amendments (SAPA, SF0101).

When Governor Mark Gordon vetoed SAPA, which would have added a civil process to Wyoming’s existing criminal Second Amendment Protection laws that GOA helped pass in 2022, both he and some in the law enforcement community misrepresented many aspects of the actual Bill text.

With this Alert, we want to address some of the worst mischaracterizations from the Governor’s veto letter (Click Here for Gordon’s Letter).

SAPA MYTH VERSUS REALITY

1) The “Cartel” and “Smuggling” Fallacy – Governor Gordon suggested that updating SAPA would have hindered prosecutions of “violent crime,” “cartel activity,” and “cross-border smuggling.” This is categorically false. As the legislation was written, all protections applied “SOLELY” to federal actions regarding firearms enforced against “LAW-ABIDING CITIZENS.”

The bill explicitly defined “law-abiding” citizen as a person not prohibited under Wyoming law from possessing a firearm, and it did not protect any person not lawfully present in the United States. The Bill placed zero restrictions on the ability of state and local authorities to collaborate in federal actions related to illegals and violent crime.

2) The “Criminals Will Get Away with Crime” Fallacy – By conflating crime and terrorism with the activities of law-abiding Wyoming citizens, the Governor and federal agencies engaged in fear-mongering rather than an honest reading of the law.

The Bill was targeted in scope, by protecting only law-abiding citizens, and it specifically allowed the enforcement of all Wyoming laws and any federal law not specifically targeted at firearms (i.e. drug enforcement or immigration enforcement would still be allowed).

3) Correcting the “Printz v. United States” Court Ruling Fallacy – The Governor cited Printz v. United States as a reason why the bill was “unnecessary.” This was a major legal error.

Printz merely establishes that the federal government cannot FORCE state and local authorities to enforce federal law (anti-commandeering doctrine).

The Printz Court Ruling does nothing to prevent state and local authorities from “voluntarily” using taxpayer-funded Wyoming personnel and resources to enforce federal firearms orders or laws that have no parallel in Wyoming statutes.

4) The Governor’s Assertion that SAPA was a “meal ticket for litigators” Fallacy – In reality, the provisions found in SAPA Amendments (SF0101) would have merely ensured that state and local authorities paused to consider whether or not an activity was “Solely” related to federal firearms operations. Federal operations that were “Solely” related to firearms operations would be off-limits, and other federal operations could continue as they do now.

Any citizen who felt their Rights were violated by Wyoming’s participation in a federal firearms operation would face a long uphill battle. They would have to be able to afford to hire attorneys and seek Justice under this law. That process is not cheap as GOA knows full well. Most attorneys will not take these cases on a Contingency basis but instead want thousands of dollars up-front before taking a court case against “The Government.”

Furthermore, and despite some claims to the contrary, any payouts from successful lawsuits would come from Agency budgets because the bill specifically protected individual officers from being sued.

SUMMING IT ALL UP

Opposition to the Bill was rooted in a strong desire to maintain a strong connection between federal and Wyoming police power.

As GOA’s Senior Vice President Erich Pratt stated, “this bill was about drawing a line in the sand. It was about ensuring that if the federal government chooses to pursue a path of unconstitutional firearm restrictions, they must do so without the help of Wyoming’s resources. We remain committed to seeing these protections enacted and holding the Governor accountable for turning his back on the Second Amendment.”

It is safe to say that the Wyoming Governor exercised the immense power of the Wyoming Executive Branch and stood alongside federal authorities while ignoring the will of nearly three-quarters of the elected Wyoming Legislature who originally voted to pass SF0101.

There is much to be proud of following the 2026 Legislative Session because two very good Bills did pass into law, yet we still have work to do to provide civil lawsuit provisions for citizens to seek relief when their Second Amendment Rights are violated.

Please stayed tuned as we will bring our members and supporters more information about these and other Second Amendment issues in the near future.

What: Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced that a Texas federal judge has denied a DOJ motion to gut FPC’s major Second Amendment victory in FPC v. Bondi, a case where the court previously held that peaceable Americans must be allowed to carry firearms in Post Offices. As a result, the injunction in the case will continue to apply “to Plaintiffs and to all present and future members of Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc.”

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

March 16, 2026

Empowered 2A Names the Derya DY9Z as the 2026 Empowered 2A Gun of the Year

Springfield, VA – Empowered 2A is proud to announce that the Derya DY9Z has been named as the 2026 Empowered 2A Gun of the Year, recognizing its innovation, reliability, and appeal to today’s diverse community of firearm owners—especially women seeking performance, confidence, and style in their defensive tools.

Manufactured by Derya Arms, the DY9Z is a striker-fired 9mm semi-automatic pistol that blends dependable performance with thoughtful design. Its compact profile, 15+1 capacity, and optics-ready slide make it a practical choice for personal defense, concealed carry, and range use. Additional features, such as a reversible magazine catch and an integrated accessory rail, provide versatility for shooters of all experience levels.

What truly sets the DY9Z apart is its unique blend of performance and personalization. The pistol is available in a variety of vibrant color options—each designed to reflect individual style while maintaining the same high standard of reliability and function.

Suk Smith, Chair of Empowered 2A stated:

“We are honored to have Derya Arms named Empowered 2A Gun of the Year by Gun Owners Foundation— a recognition of innovation and performance, and a powerful nod to women everywhere who are stepping forward with confidence, skill, and independence. This honor reflects a growing movement of women who train, lead, protect their families, and shape the future of responsible ownership with strength and purpose.”

The Empowered 2A Gun of the Year Award recognizes firearms that deliver exceptional quality, innovation, and accessibility to the modern gun owner. With its thoughtful engineering and distinctive design options, the DY9Z represents a new generation of firearms that empower responsible gun ownership.

GOF spokesmen are available for interviews. Gun Owners Foundation is a nonprofit organization focused on education and litigation and is the sister organization of Gun Owners of America, a nonprofit grassroots lobbying organization representing over two million members and activists. For more information, visit GOA’s Press Center.

-GOA- 

Setting the Record Straight on SB 1071 in West Virginia

In recent days, West Virginia Senate President Randy Smith released a public statement regarding SB 1071, the Public Defense and Provisioning Act. His comments have created confusion about the bill’s drafting, legality, and level of expert review.

It is essential that West Virginians have the full and accurate factual record. Many of the claims made about SB 1071 do not reflect the truth, and the following information provides a clear, fact-driven response based on verifiable legal authorities and documented expert analysis.

A Bill with Momentum — and an Unexpected Intervention

The fight for modern firearms equality began in early February. West Virginia made national history when it became the first state in America to introduce legislation authorizing the lawful sale of post-1986 machine guns under the federal carve-out in 18 U.S.C.922(o)(2)(A).

SB 1071 immediately ignited excitement among legislators, industry leaders, and grassroots supporters. Other states quickly took notice—several have already copied West Virginia’s language, and more are preparing to introduce their own versions.

A flash poll conducted by Gun Owners of America showed overwhelming enthusiasm among West Virginians, with 94 percent saying their out-of-state family and friends would be more likely to move to West Virginia if this bill became law. The momentum was real, and the nation was watching.

SB 1071 was introduced by Senator Chris Rose, a member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and the committee advanced the bill with overwhelming support. But immediately after that vote, the bill seemed to vanish.

Chairman Tom Willis, who had reported the bill out of Judiciary, was himself confused about why it had not moved to the Finance Committee as expected. This unusual stallprompted West Virginians across the state to begin calling their Senators, demandingSen. Chris Rose (left), sponsor of SB 1071, stands with Senate PresidentRandy Smith.
answers about what had happened to a bill that had just passed committee with overwhelming support.

In response to the growing public concern, Senate President Randy Smith publicly stated that he personally made the decision to halt SB 1071, clarifying that the choice did not come from Chairman Willis or the Judiciary Committee. This admission dramatically shifted the understanding of events. What many initially believed to be procedural delay within Judiciary now appeared to be a direct intervention from Senate leadership.

Additionally, several advocates and legal experts have raised serious concerns that President Smith may have been relying on information provided by an outside individual who strongly opposed SB 1071 and may have misrepresented key legal facts about the bill.

According to these observers, this misinformation appears to have played a significant role in shaping the Senate President’s decision—ultimately stopping a bill that had strong public support, clear legislative interest, and validation from some of the most respected constitutional attorneys in the country.

This context is essential for understanding how SB 1071 was derailed and why an accurate factual record matters as West Virginians evaluate what happened and determine the path forward.

SB 1071 Was Carefully Drafted and Reviewed by Leading Constitutional Attorneys

Senate President Smith’s assertion that SB 1071 was “poorly drafted” or created without proper legal review is contradicted by the actual record. SB 1071 was reviewed, refined, and endorsed by some of the most accomplished constitutional litigators in the United States.

In addition to Gun Owners of America’s legal team, a number of well-respected Second Amendment attorneys around the country reviewed the theory behind SB 1071 in detail, and agreed that the legal theory—while untested—is sound.

These attorneys have argued and won cases before the U.S. Supreme Court, litigated major Second Amendment cases in the Second, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, Ninth, and D.C. Circuits, and served as counsel in significant federal firearms law challenges involving the National Firearms Act and 18 U.S.C. 922(o).

These experts examined the statutory structure, the federal carveouts, and the administrative process contemplated in the bill and concluded that SB 1071 is fully consistent with federal law when implemented through the ATF Form 5 process. This is nota fringe interpretation; it is the position of attorneys who operate at the highest levels of federal constitutional litigation.

For example, Mark Smith is a constitutional attorney and member of the bar of the U.S. Supreme Court. His Four Boxes Diner podcast has been twice voted as the “Top Voice of the Second Amendment,” and his legal scholarship on the Second Amendment has been cited in litigation and legal briefs, including the Bruen and Rahimi cases.

Mark Smith spent an entire episode of his podcast analyzing SB 1071 in very favorable terms and said, “This West Virginia proposal is very legitimate [and] could have a very real impact on the Second Amendment community.”

The claim that SB 1071 would face insurmountable legal challenges is also contradicted by existing federal case law. In a recent filing in a Maryland federal district court, the Bondi Department of Justice interpreted 18 U.S.C. 922(o)(2)(A) in the same way that SB 1071 does. A federal judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Judge Lawrence VanDyke, recently interpreted the statute in the same way. That interpretation recognizes a clear statutory carveout allowing the United States, along with state and local governments, to acquire, possess, and transfer machine guns through the National Firearms Act’s established procedures.

Under this carveout, the federal government and the states may lawfully conduct such transfers, provided they comply with the ATF Form 5 approval process. SB 1071 was drafted precisely to operate within this framework, requiring state acquisition, state possession, state-initiated transfer, and mandatory federal approval before any civilian receives a firearm. This is the exact process federal courts have already acknowledged as lawful.

Questions About a Lobbyist’s Claims

It is also important to address the claim that SB 1071 could not pass the House of Delegates. In the days following its introduction, House members publicly expressedinterest in advancing the bill, multiple Delegates requested that it be placed on committeeagendas, and the House Judiciary Committee received extensive public support andindustry engagement. The bill generated unprecedented national attention and significanteconomic interest. The assertion that the House would not seriously consider the bill is not supported by the documented response from Delegates or the public.

The suggestion that SB 1071 lacked support from established gun rights organizations is incomplete. While the Senate President referenced the NRA and WVCDL, those organizations have been reported to be either in favor of the bill or neutral.

Even more concerning, Second Amendment journalist John Crump has reported that a lobbyist, who claimed to represent the NRA during this legislative session, was not acting
on the organization’s behalf. In fact, the NRA leadership reports that this individual has not represented the group for at least two years.

This means that Senator Randy Smith may have been intentionally misled by a lobbyist who was misrepresenting himself to Senators—not only about his role with the NRA, but about that organization’s position on the bill.

Moreover, Crump reports this “pro gun” lobbyist stated at gun show—in front of several witnesses—that he would kill this machine gun bill in West Virginia and in Kentucky.

Jared Yanis, who is the host of Guns & Gadgets, has invited this lobbyist to come on his program and explain himself, but as of this writing, that lobbyist has yet to accept the offer.

The Full Record Shows SB 1071 was Legally Sound and Broadly Supported

Senator Smith also omitted the fact that Gun Owners of America, one of the largest and most active national Second Amendment organizations, strongly supported SB 1071.Numerous West Virginia manufacturers, FFLs, and industry leaders endorsed the bill, and national firearms law scholars and litigators provided written and verbal support. SB 1071 generated more public engagement than any other firearms related measure this session. The claim that the bill lacked credible support does not reflect the record.

Concern about online behavior by some individuals does not change the legal merits of the bill. While no one condones harassment or threats, these incidents are not attributable to the bill’s authors, supporters, or Gun Owners of America, nor do they bear on the bill’s constitutionality or legislative merit.

Senator Smith implied that GOA encouraged supporters to protest at legislators’ homes. But that allegation is categorically false. Anyone who reviews our website and member alerts will find no instance where GOA has ever promoted such conduct.

In the end, these fallacious claims were a mere distraction—an intent to justify the killing of the bill. And this is why for seasoned veterans of the political process, legislation should be evaluated on its legal foundation, economic impact, and public benefit, not on isolated online comments.

Finally, the timing of the bill’s introduction does not diminish its legality or viability. SB1071 was introduced in accordance with the rules and deadlines of the West VirginiaSenate. Many significant bills are introduced later in session, and the Legislature routinely processes complex legislation on compressed timelines. The timing does not change the bill’s legal validity, economic potential, or national significance, nor does it alter the fact that the bill rests on sound legal theory which has been endorsed by the Department of Justice and federal judges.

To summarize, the factual record shows that SB 1071 was:

• Reviewed and endorsed by nationally recognized constitutional attorneys
• Supported by federal case law and DOJ litigation positions
• Fully compliant with 18 U.S.C. 922(o)(2)(A) and the ATF Form 5 process
• Backed by substantial public, industrial, and legislative interest
• Legally defensible and economically transformative for West Virginia
• Met West Virginia Senate Deadlines

Any evaluation of SB 1071 should reflect these facts, the existing federal and state carveouts, and the well-supported legal scholarship confirming that states may lawfully acquire and transfer machine guns under federal law.

Make sure to stay informed on the latest efforts to pass the machine gun bill into law, by following GOA on Facebook at: Gun Owners of America-West Virginia.

Empowered 2A Opens Registration for National Women’s Range Day 2026

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

March 12th, 2026

Epping, NH – Gun Owners Foundation’s (GOF) Empowered 2A proudly announces that registration is now open for National Women’s Range Day 2026, taking place Saturday, June 6th 2026 at the world-renowned Sig Sauer Academy and Experience in Epping, New Hampshire.

This event—hosted by GOF’s coalition of female firearms enthusiasts—will bring together leading instructors, advocates, and influencers from across the nation to deliver a full-spectrum empowerment experience for women.

Attendees will participate in live-fire training, Stop the Bleed® training, self-defense instruction, and Second Amendment advocacy education — all designed to build confidence, skills, and a stronger voice for freedom.

The event will also feature exclusive vendor exhibits, key 2A influencers, training sessions, and special discounts at the Sig Sauer Experience Center. Each participant will receive a complimentary annual membership to Gun Owners of America.

Suk Smith, Chair of Gun Owners Foundation Empowered 2A issued the following statement:

“National Women’s Range Day is about more than marksmanship — it’s about courage, empowerment, and the unwavering belief that every woman has the right and ability to protect herself, inspire others, and lead with confidence both on and off the range.”

GOF spokesmen are available for interviews. Gun Owners Foundation is a nonprofit organization focused on education and litigation and is the sister organization of Gun Owners of America, a nonprofit grassroots lobbying organization representing over two million members and activists. For more information, visit GOA’s Press Center.

-GOF-

Will Republicans ask him? How about Ranking Member Chuck Grassley? [More]

I'm going to end up sending questions about infringements by "AFT" to Senate Judiciary Committee Republicans to put to the nominee while he's under oath, so feel free to leave your own in the article's "Comments" section.

I have two articles in this month's issue, on sale now at discerning newsstands throughout the Republic. [More]

I'm not resuming regular blogging because of the unresolved censorship issue but will continue to promote my work here as I prepare a new landing site.