This week, we're looking at how the lower courts have handled AR-15 ban challenges in light of the Supreme Court's latest Second Amendment case.

To explain the consensus that's developed across the appellate courts and provide a different perspective, we have Georgia State University Law Professor Andrew Willinger on the show. Willinger is the former executive director of the Duke University Firearms Law Center, and he teaches a class on the Second Amendment. He's also been critical of the Court's Second Amendment standard and its application at times.

He noted that every appellate court to decide an "assault weapons" or "high-capacity" magazine case has upheld restrictions on the devices. He said they've largely coalesced around similar reasoning. While the Supreme Court has gone out of its way to emphasize that step one of the Bruen test is meant to be a pretty simple filter, Willinger said most lower courts have actually upheld AR bans at step two.

Willinger said they've identified things like 19th-century Bowie knife bans as the core historical analogue for modern AR bans. He said courts have padded those laws with much earlier and much later weapons restrictions, such as the National Firearms Act of the 1930s. He noted some courts have also used the similarity between AR-15s and military weapons, like the M-16, to uphold the modern bans.

He rejected the idea that the consensus surrounding assault weapons bans in the lower courts is primarily a product of geography. Gun-rights activists have long claimed the fact that only a handful of deep blue states have these sorts of bans means only left-leaning circuits have the opportunity to review them. But Willinger argued that the judges involved in the decisions come from a fairly diverse background, with a number of them being Republican appointees.

Still, Willinger said he doubts the Supreme Court will find the same way the lower courts have. He argued we already know that four of the Republican appointees would strike down the law based on their public statements. He said Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett are the only Republican appointees who haven't directly opined on the laws, but he also said he doesn't think they'll both split from the other conservatives.

Special Guest: Andrew Willinger.

Contributing writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss the latest injunction issued by a state court judge against Virginia's "assault firearms" ban which would block its enforcement across the entire commonwealth. We also cover resurfaced video of Texas Senate candidate James Talarico (D.) voicing support for an "assault weapon" and "high capacity" magazine ban.

Stories:
-https://thereload.com/virginia-ar-15-ban-to-be-blocked-statewide-dealers-begin-preparing-new-sales/
-https://thereload.com/texass-talarico-backed-ar-15-ammo-mag-ban-in-2020-meet-and-greet/
-https://thereload.com/seventh-circuit-questions-mental-health-gun-ban/
-https://chicago.suntimes.com/us-supreme-court/2026/07/09/assault-weapon-illinois-cook-county-supreme-court
-https://bearingarms.com/camedwards/2026/07/08/atf-director-pushes-back-on-maddows-attack-on-agency-n1233114

The Supreme Court has taken up a Second Amendment challenge to a pair of AR-15 sales bans. It's one of the most consequential in the Court's history of gun cases.

To discuss it, we have someone who has been around for that entire history and played a major role in shaping the Court's Second Amendment jurisprudence. Lawyer Stephen Halbrook joins the show to explain that history and provide insight into how it will likely rule in the AR case.

Halbrook said the legal landscape was very different when he first started studying the issue. At that time, the idea that the Second Amendment protects much of anything was out of favor with the lower courts. Instead, he said, the collective-right formulation was the most widely accepted.

He noted it was a fairly small cohort of lawyers and academics that changed the legal landscape on the Second Amendment. He said the individual-rights formulation caught on quickly and culminated in the 2008 DC v. Heller decision. From there, the Court incorporated the Second Amendment right to own guns to the states in McDonald v. Chicago and then recognized the right to carry outside the home in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen.

Halbrook said the Court added to its pro-gun precedents in the two cases it decided this year, and he expects it'll do the same again when it decides the AR-15 ban. He also provided some specific insight into why he believes the Court will go that direction and which justices are the ones to watch.

Special Guest: Stephen Halbrook.

Contributing writer Jake Fogleman and I discuss the US Supreme Court finally agreeing to review the constitutionality of bans on AR-15s and similar rifles next term. We also provide a status update on Virginia's new ban on those same weapons, which officially went into effect despite multiple court injunctions. Plus, we hear from a Reload Member with a fascinating background!

Stories:
-https://thereload.com/supreme-court-to-decide-constitutionality-of-ar-15-bans/
-https://thereload.com/experts-expect-supreme-court-to-strike-down-ar-15-bans/
-https://thereload.com/virginia-assault-firearms-ban-takes-effect-amid-murky-legal-situation-soaring-gun-sales/

This week, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) struck down Hawaii's broadest gun-carry restriction.

To discuss the outcome of the case, we have the lawyer who won it on the show. Wolford v. Lopez was Alan Beck's first case at SCOTUS, and it turned into his first win. He said he was very happy with where the Court came down and sees it opening several new avenues for Second Amendment challenges.

Beck said the majority sided with his view of Hawaii's requirement that anyone carrying a gun get explicit permission to enter publicly accessible private property, which he explained critics have dubbed the "Vampire Rule" because vampires also need permission to enter. He said the Court performed the Bruen test the way he asked and expected, by treating step one as a simple filter rather than an exhaustive historical review. Then they examined and rejected Hawaii's use of anti-poaching laws (and even a Black code) as historical analogues for its modern law.

He rejected the contention from several justices and outside commentators that the majority significantly changed the Bruen test, especially at step one. He said the Court did the test in line with how it had previously done it. Although, he argued many lower courts had been misapplying that step, and the Court walking through step one in more detail than before could be in response to that.

Beck said, even without the Court changing its test, further clarifying how to do step one could upend several recent lower-court cases. He noted how new the Court's Second Amendment jurisprudence is, and said people shouldn't expect every new case to make massive new updates to its test. Instead, he said it will likely take decades for the Court to fully flesh out the Second Amendment, just as it did with the First.

He also revealed what direction and new cases he plans to pursue in the wake of the Court's latest Second Amendment holdings. Beck said he's already started working on getting Hawaii to change some of its other gun restrictions.

Special Guest: Alan Beck.

Contributing writer Jake Fogleman and I cover the Supreme Court's new ruling in Wolford v. Lopez, where the Court held that Hawaii may not legally ban licensed gun carry on publicly accessible private property by default. We also discuss the new injunction issued by a Virginia judge against the state's AR-15 ban just days before it was set to take effect.

Stories:
-https://thereload.com/supreme-court-strikes-down-hawaii-vampire-rule/
-https://thereload.com/state-judge-blocks-virginia-assault-firearm-sales-ban/
-https://thereload.com/doj-sets-sights-on-california-glock-ban-handgun-roster/
-https://thereload.com/federal-judge-allows-nra-to-continue-trademark-suit-against-its-foundation/

This week, we're taking a look at the state of the National Rifle Association (NRA) as it faces what may be its biggest challenge yet.

The NRA has survived 150 years, a corruption lawsuit, and a bankruptcy filing. But it is now staring down a potential crackup with the group's foundation attempting to split off. Ohio State University accounting professor Brian Mittendorf joins the show to explain just how much of a threat to the group's financial stability.

Mittendorf said the battle between the foundation and the NRA membership organization, which recently escalated when the foundation's leadership dropped the NRA moniker from the group's name, could be catastrophic for both. The NRA houses most of the actual operations people associate with the group, but the foundation has long served as a key financial backstop. He argued that without it, the NRA could be back on the path to devastation, and without the NRA name, the foundation could struggle to raise new funds.

He explained the complex, though not uncommon, financial setup behind the consolidated NRA, which actually involves seven different legal entities. Mittendorf said the foundation's large endowment and low expense structure have long been able to paper over some of the financial struggles of the membership organization. The NRA's latest report indicates the foundation houses nearly 70 percent of the combined organization's net assets and cash.

Mittendorf noted that the NRA is still much larger than all of the other gun-rights groups combined, despite losing huge sums of members and revenue over the past half-decade. He said the group's latest annual report shows the NRA has also managed to staunch some of the bleeding and put itself on a more sustainable path. But, ultimately, he said the foundation fight threatens to undo any progress the group has made.

Special Guest: Brian Mittendorf.

Contributing writer Jake Fogleman and I break down the US Supreme Court's first major Second Amendment decision of the year in US v. Hemani, where the justices unanimously upheld the gun rights of a regular marijuana user. We also discuss the Court's rejection of several additional gun cases and cover the latest litigation against Virginia's "assault firearm" ban.

Stories:
-https://thereload.com/supreme-court-unanimously-rules-in-favor-of-pot-smoking-gun-owner/
-https://thereload.com/scotus-declines-two-second-amendment-challenges-against-new-york-relists-25-other-gun-case/