The Trump administration’s Justice Division has delivered a major blow to gun management advocates by declaring that Washington, DC’s ban on massive capability magazines violates the Second Modification.
In an unprecedented authorized transfer, the USA filed an unopposed movement to vacate the conviction of Juan Peterson, who had been discovered responsible on November 9, 2023, following a jury trial for possession of a large-capacity ammunition feeding system below D.C. Code § 7-2506.01(b).
The controversy facilities on Peterson’s problem to his conviction on Second Modification grounds. On attraction to the District of Columbia Courtroom of Appeals, Peterson argued that the statute infringes upon constitutionally protected rights. In a dramatic reversal, the USA conceded Peterson’s argument and requested that the courtroom vacate his conviction and remand the rely to the Superior Courtroom for dismissal.
Of their submitting, the Justice Division made their place crystal clear: “It’s the USA’s place that § 7-2506.01(b) is unconstitutional. In consequence, the USA is just not prosecuting violations of § 7-2506.01(b), and believes that, within the pursuits of justice, Peterson’s conviction ought to be vacated.” The federal government went additional, stating that the statute encroaches upon Second Modification rights and can’t survive constitutional scrutiny.
The federal authorities’s new place attracts on Supreme Courtroom rulings in District of Columbia v. Heller and New York State Rifle & Pistol Affiliation v. Bruen, which established that arms “in widespread use” by law-abiding residents for lawful functions obtain Second Modification safety. Customary-capacity magazines holding greater than 10 rounds are terribly widespread, with over 700 million in circulation nationwide, in keeping with analysis by NSSF. These magazines come commonplace with lots of America’s hottest firearms and facilitate armed self-defense.
The Justice Division’s movement invoked highly effective authorized rules to justify its reversal. Citing Magnus v. United States, the submitting declared that “a conviction for conduct that’s not felony, however is as an alternative constitutionally-protected, is the last word miscarriage of justice.”
The federal government emphasised elementary equity, arguing that “as a result of the USA wouldn’t cost a defendant equally located to Peterson below D.C. Code § 7-2506.01(b) if arrested at the moment, vacatur of Peterson’s conviction would guarantee elementary equity.”
Whereas the movement acknowledged that constitutional adjudication is “a matter of nice gravity and delicacy,” citing In re Vibrant Concepts Co., the Justice Division decided that avoiding the constitutional query was now not tenable when the statute itself violated Second Modification protections.
Kostas Moros, Director of Authorized Analysis and Schooling on the Second Modification Basis, introduced consideration to the submitting on social media. Moros posted on X on October 24, 2025, noting that the USA had moved to vacate Peterson’s conviction “as a result of it’s the USA’s place that § 7-2506.01(b) is unconstitutional.”
In a submitting within the DC Courtroom of Appeals final month in a felony matter, the USA moved to vacate the appellant’s conviction below D.C. Code § 7-2506.01(b) for possession of a big capability ammunition feeding system, as a result of “[i]t is the USA’s place that §… pic.twitter.com/7KUfcNlHxe
— Kostas Moros (@MorosKostas) October 24, 2025
Harmeet Dhillon, the Assistant Lawyer Normal for Civil Rights on the DOJ, retweeted Moros’ put up, saying “I’m very pleased with the Second Modification work of this @TheJusticeDept … day-to-day, we’re making progress.”
I’m very pleased with the Second Modification work of this @TheJusticeDept … day-to-day, we’re making progress. https://t.co/Xj2HzCXXzA
— AAGHarmeetDhillon (@AAGDhillon) October 24, 2025
This marks the primary time the federal authorities has taken an official authorized place, declaring a selected large-capacity journal ban unconstitutional. The Peterson case demonstrates the shifting panorama of gun rights litigation, with the federal government shifting from defending the statute to conceding its unconstitutionality. This growth might have nationwide implications for the 14 states and DC that at the moment prohibit journal capability, probably undermining the authorized foundations for comparable bans in California, New Jersey, Illinois, and different jurisdictions.
The case additionally alerts broader traits in judicial scrutiny of firearm laws. Courts are more and more inspecting whether or not firearm legal guidelines align with constitutional protections following the Bruen choice, which might result in cascading authorized challenges to different restrictions. Second Modification advocates are prone to cite this precedent when difficult comparable legal guidelines in different jurisdictions, emboldened by the federal authorities’s acknowledgment that such bans might infringe upon constitutionally protected rights.
With the Justice Division backing away from protection of the ban and actively looking for to vacate convictions below the statute, advocates throughout the nation see a brand new daybreak for gun rights protections. The District of Columbia, although listed as an intervenor-appellee within the case, now faces the prospect of defending its journal ban with out federal help.
Florida Sheriff Calls McDonald’s Taking pictures a “McMess” After Worker Defends Himself In opposition to Threats ~ VIDEOS
Anti-Gunners Simply Obliterated the Best Gun Management Fable
About José Niño
José Niño is a contract author based mostly in Charlotte, North Carolina. You possibly can contact him by way of Fb and X/Twitter. Subscribe to his Substack publication by visiting “Jose Nino Unfiltered” on Substack.com.
