BELLEVUE, Wash. — March 31, 2025 — The Second Modification Basis has filed an amicus temporary with the U.S. Supreme Court docket supporting petitioners in a case referred to as Andrew Hanson, et.al., v. District of Columbia, et.al., difficult the District’s ban on so-called “high-capacity magazines” able to holding greater than ten cartridges.
SAF is joined by the Nationwide Rifle Affiliation. The case has nationwide implications and the amicus temporary calls the court docket’s consideration to the truth that the federal circuit courts are divided on the query whether or not magazines are “arms,” what constitutes “frequent use,” and whether or not arms most helpful for navy service are protected by the Second Modification.
SAF is represented by lawyer Adam Kraut, who’s SAF’s government director. NRA is represented by attorneys Joseph G.S. Greenlee and Erin M. Erhardt on the NRA Institute for Legislative Motion.
“In our temporary,” Kraut famous, “we remind the court docket that repeating arms predate the Second Modification by roughly three centuries, and that semiautomatic firearms had been invented in 1885. Likewise, removable field magazines got here alongside again in 1862. Regardless of technological advances over the previous 200 years, neither the sale nor possession of repeating arms of any capability had been ever banned in the USA.”
“The very essence of the Second Modification is to guard the best to maintain and bear arms,” stated SAF founder and Government Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “The language of the Second Modification doesn’t stipulate which bearable arms are protected, solely that they’re, and that the best of the individuals to bear these arms shall not be infringed. Due to the decrease court docket break up on whether or not magazines are ‘arms,’ we imagine the excessive court docket must resolve this controversy with out additional delay.”
