| THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA’S HIGHEST COURT STRIKES DOWN DC’S MAGAZINE CAPACITY BAN On March 5, 2026, the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, the District’s highest court, issued a decision in Benson v. United States, holding that the District of Columbia’s ban on magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition is unconstitutional because it violates the Second Amendment. This decision has significant implications because fourteen states have laws prohibiting the sale or possession of magazines based on their capacity. In Benson, the court concluded that magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds are “arms” for purposes of the Second Amendment, and that they are in “not only common but ubiquitous use for lawful purposes” across the United States. The court further found, using the framework articulated in the Supreme Court’s decision in N.Y. State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, that “there is no history or tradition of blanket bans on arms in such common use.” As a result, the court held that the District of Columbia’s ban on magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds is unconstitutional. The Benson case arose from the conviction of the defendant who was stopped by law enforcement in the District and found to be in possession of a semi-automatic pistol equipped with a 30-round magazine. The defendant was charged and convicted of multiple offenses, including violation of D.C. Code § 7-2506.01(b)-(c), the District’s law prohibiting possession of magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition. In defense of the charges against him, the defendant challenged the constitutionality of the District’s magazine capacity ban, arguing that it violated the Second Amendment. After holding that the magazine capacity restriction is unconstitutional, the Court of Appeals reversed the defendant’s convictions. This decision is important because it recognizes that magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds are components of many commonly owned firearms and are possessed by millions of Americans for lawful purposes. Applying the Bruen test, the court found that there is no analogous historical tradition of firearm regulation that would support a ban on such magazines. The decision creates a divide among the federal circuit courts and state courts of last resort because federal Courts of Appeals have upheld similar laws in other states. For example, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals last year upheld California’s magazine capacity ban in the case of Duncan v. Bonta. The court in Benson explicitly disagreed with the Ninth Circuit’s finding in Duncan that ownership statistics related to the use of magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition are not an appropriate measurement of “common use.” The Bensen court found that ownership statistics are relevant to the Bruen analysis and that such magazines “are the most preferred type of magazine” in the United States. This split means that the constitutionality of laws prohibiting magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds of ammunition will eventually require resolution by the Supreme Court. The Bensen decision is another example of courts attempting to interpret and apply the Bruen historical tradition test with respect to firearms laws around the country. The Supreme Court is expected to provide more guidance on how to apply the Bruen test when it issues a decision later this year in United States v. Hemani, which will address the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(3), a provision of the Gun Control Act that prohibits the possession of firearms by anyone who is an “unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance.” Renzulli Law Firm, LLP will continue to monitor new and developing firearms related litigation around the country. If you have any questions concerning the firearms industry, please contact Christopher Renzulli. |
| Renzulli Law Firm is Monitoring Firearm-Related Legislative Developments Renzulli Law Firm, nationally recognized as one of the premier law firms in the country serving the Firearms Industry, is monitoring legislative developments affecting the industry and publishing regular updates which are available by e-mail and on the Firm’s website. Our firearms legislation updates are available here. Additional information about the Firm’s litigation, counseling and consulting services for the Firearms Industry is available here. |