By Tanya Metaksa
What’s New— DOJ has finalized and will relaunch a federal process for restoring firearm rights lost under federal law; State Legislatures: California: In the final week of the session passed three bills and sent them to Gov. Gavin Newsom; Politics: Oklahoma primary runoffs and a South Carolina Republican special-primary runoff; Remaining Primary Elections Calendar: September 8 & 9 primary elections with listing of endorsed candidates; Firearms Statistic, the Second Amendment and the U.S. Supreme Court.
DOJ has finalized and will relaunch a federal process
for restoring firearm rights lost under federal law.
NRA-ILA has written about relief from firearm disabilities that has been effectively unavailable for approximately 34 years due to annual appropriations riders barred ATF from spending funds to process restoration applications.
What DOJ did
On Aug. 20, DOJ published a final rule setting application standards for relief from federal firearm disabilities under the Gun Control Act, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 925(c). The rule completes a process begun in February 2025 and shifts program administration away from ATF to DOJ under the Attorney General’s statutory authority.
Rollout schedule
DOJ plans a phased launch:
- Sept. 26, 2026: Invited applicant pool opens.
- Nov. 4, 2026: DOJ will accept 5,000 applications from the general public.
- Jan. 4, 2027: An additional 500 applications will be accepted.
The rule anticipates approximately 330,000 applications per year once the system is functioning.
New Changes
The article says DOJ incorporated several NRA-ILA recommendations:
- Certain technical Gun Control Act violations trigger presumptive ineligibility for 10 years after sentence completion, rather than permanently.
- An applicant unable to obtain required records may submit an affidavit explaining the effort made and why records cannot be secured.
- DOJ may revoke granted relief only if it can show that the underlying application was fraudulent.
- DOJ removed a proposed requirement that applicants notify their chief local law-enforcement officer.
Continuing objections
NRA-ILA criticizes the rule as still overly bureaucratic and as giving DOJ substantial discretion over individual applications—discretion it argues a later administration might use restrictively. The group also objects to the added requirement that applicants disclose overseas arrests and prosecutions, even where foreign convictions would not themselves create a federal firearms disability.
Only a federal application
A successful federal application would address only a federal firearm disability. An applicant subject to an independent state-law prohibition must pursue whatever separate state restoration procedure applies.
State Legislatures: Still in session:
States running through to Dec. 31: Michigan, New Jersey, and Ohio. Pennsylvania session runs through Nov. 30, 2027.
California: The legislature has been working through many bills including onerous gun bills. As we enter the final legislative week three bills have been passed in the legislature and are headed for Governor Newsom’s signature:
- AB1743 after passing the Senate, requires a concurrence vote in the Assembly. This bill seeks to expand the access to firearms’ owners’ information. A concern since personal gun owner information was widely leaked in 2022.
- SB948 significantly expands California’s Firearm Safety Certificate requirements by mandating a minimum four-hour class with live-fire and official instruction starting in 2028.
- SB1220 creates a new misdemeanor crime that bans guns and results in a 10-year firearm ban for anyone convicted of dealing with a gun that has altered identifying marks or a removed serial number. California already classifies this behavior as a misdemeanor; this bill just adds another way to lose your constitutional rights over a growing list of lesser offenses.
Politics
Oklahoma primary runoffs and a South Carolina Republican special-primnary runoff
OKLAHOMA PRIMARY RUNOFF
GOVERNOR: Although both candidates were given an A by the NRA PVF, Republican Mike Massei won the Republican runoff, narrowly defeating Attorney General Gentner Drummond, 50.3% to 49.7%.
State House: District 18: David Smith was the winner.
SOUTH CAROLINA PRIMARY RUNOFF
- South Carolina U.S. Senate: Sen. Darline Graham won the Republican special-primary runoff against Rep. Ralph Norman, 52.5% to 47.5%.
Primaries – Sept. 8, and Sept. 9, 2026
Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island
Massachusetts: (Sept. 8) With the exception of Representative Turco there are no other endorsements in Massachusetts.
State House: Suffolk District 19: Jeffrey Rosario Turco
New Hampshire: (Sept. 8)
U.S. Senate: This seat is important for the Republicans to hold the U.S. Senate in 2026. Among 12 candidates only John E. Sununu (R) received an A from the NRA-PVF. He is the son of former New Hampshire Governor and White House Chief of Staff John H. Sununu and the brother of former Governor Chris Sununu. He served as a Republican former U.S. representative and senator from New Hampshire. Sununu was elected in 1996 to represent New Hampshire’s First Congressional District in the U.S. House, where he served three terms from 1997 to 2003. In 2002, he won election to the U.S. Senate, serving from 2003 through 2009; at age 38, he was the Senate’s youngest member throughout his term. He lost his 2008 reelection race to Jeanne Shaheen.
Governor: Current Governor Kelly Ayotte is endorsed for re-election.
Executive Council: Seat 4: John Stephen: A
U.S. Congress: District 1: Brian Cole: A; Anthony DiLorenzo: AQ
State Senate: District 16: Keith Murphy
State House: Belknap 2: Scott Walker; Belknap 4: Kevin M. Nugent, Jr.; Belknap 6: Rep. Glen Aldrich; Carroll 3 (pick 2): Richard R. Brown; Karel A. Crawford; Carroll 5: Jonathan H, Smith; Carroll 7: Dale Fincher; Carroll 8 (pick 2): Tammy Garthwaite; Colin Mitchell; Cheshire 17: Jennifer Rhodes; Grafton 3: Paul H. Schirduan; Hillsborough 1 (pick 4): Andrew Cavanagh; Deborah Kruzel; Tom Mannion; Hillsborough 13 (pick 6): Dillon Dumont, Cathy Kenny, Jeremy Slottje, Jordan Ulery, Bob Wherry; Hillsborough 19 (pick 2): Matt Drew; Hillsborough 38 (pick 2): Adam Havestock, Ted Trost; Merrimack 2: Gregory Hill: Merrimack 3 (pick 2): Ernesto L. Gonzalez, Werner D. Horn; Merrimack 4 (pick 2): Jose Eduardo Cambrils Michael Moffett; Merrimack 8 (pick 3): Natalie Wells; Merrimack 14: Gary Matteson; Rockingham 1 (pick 3): James Guzofski, Nick Hobart, Paul Tudor; Rockingham 4 (pick 3): Cindy Bennett; Michael Drago, Brian Nadeau; Rockingham 7: Laurence A. Miner; Rockingham 9 (pick 2): Don Selby, Matthew Brooks; Rockingham 10 (pick 10): Brian K. Chirichiello, Anthony Henry, Erica Layton, David C. Love, Stephen C. Pearson, John Potucek, Brandon Back, Stephen Langelier; Rockingham 15 (pick 2): Lilli Walsh; Rockingham 16 (pick 7): Ron Dunn, David Lundgren, Wayne D. MacDonald; Jeffrey McGraw, Sherman Packard. Moira Ryan, Moira Ryan, Gregory G. Carson; Rockingham 17 (pick 4): Bob Lynn, Chales E. McMahon, Daniel Popovici-Muller; Rockingham 25 (pick 9): John Janigan, Dennis Mannion, Valerie McDonnell, Joe Sweeney, Susan J. Vandecasteele; Rockingham 30 (pick 2): Aboul B. Khan, Matt Sabourin; Rockingham 34: Mark A. Pearson; Strafford1 (pick 2): Sue DeLemus, Andy Dow; Sillivan 8 (pick 2): Catherine Peschke, Jonathan F. Stone.
Rhode Island: (September 9, 2026) There are no endorsements in this state
Firearms Statistic, the Second Amendment and the U.S. Supreme Court
When I was working at the NRA in the 1970’s, I looked forward to the release of new firearms crime statistics information, because I mistakenly thought that if those numbers dropped the push for more gun control laws would abate. I learned those promoting gun control were not interested in reducing crime, only making gun ownership more difficult, if not impossible for American citizens. The 1970’s was more than 30 years before the Heller case was brought in the District of Columbia in 2003. Now we have both the Heller and Bruen decisions as the bedrock of twenty-first century Second Amendment jurisprudence. We now hope those kind of statistics will be much more useful in the fall Supreme Court cases of Grant v. Higgins and Viramontes v. Cook County.
In a YouTube video by Mark W. Smith published this past week, he argues that a newly released 2026 National Firearms Survey materially strengthens the constitutional case against bans on AR-15-style rifles and magazines holding more than 10 rounds because the survey’s ownership estimates establish these arms are “in common use,” and that should be decisive in the pending Supreme Court litigation.
Smith focuses on Professor William English’s second-wave National Firearms Survey, conducted online in July and August with 51,398 adult respondents, including 16,688 internally validated gun owners. He presents it as timely evidence for challenges to Connecticut’s and Cook County’s semiautomatic-rifle restrictions. His legal thesis is that under the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment doctrine, (as promulgated in both Heller and Bruen, government bears the burden of justifying restrictions on arms commonly possessed for lawful purposes; he asserts that the survey makes that burden especially difficult for AR-15 bans.
The new National Firearms Survey data
- Estimated U.S. civilian firearm ownership: 461 million total firearms—about 208 million handguns, 154 million rifles, and 99 million shotguns.
- AR-15-type rifles: About 25 percent of gun owners reportedly own one; the survey estimates roughly 40 million such rifles in total.
- Other similar semiautomatic rifles: About 12.9 percent of gun owners reportedly own them, with an estimated 20 million rifles in that category.
- Combined ownership: The survey estimates 30 percent of gun owners—about 26.4 million adults—own at least one rifle in either category.
- Magazines over 10 rounds: About 50.5 percent of gun owners, or 44.5 million adults, reportedly own them; the survey estimates approximately 539 million such magazines nationwide.
- Carrying and defensive use: The survey estimates 33.6 million adult gun owners carry publicly at least sometimes, and reports an estimated 2.2 million defensive-gun-use incidents annually.
Legal framing
Referring to the two previous Supreme Court cases, Smith repeatedly characterizes AR-15s and magazines over 10 rounds as constitutionally protected because their estimated ownership demonstrates widespread lawful possession. He says the “common use” inquiry defeats any claim that these items are “dangerous and unusual,” and he expects the Court to strike down the challenged rifle bans.
The video also advances Smith’s broader normative framing: that the Second Amendment protects self-defense against “all forms of tyranny,” encompassing crime, animal attacks, terrorism, foreign invasion, and governmental oppression.
Important caveat
As both Smith and I are Second Amendment advocates, his video and my reporting do not represent a neutral legal assessment. As he states many times, the future is yet to be written, but the in June 2027, we are hopeful that there will be a favorable Supreme Court outcome. Hopeful that fifty years after I thought that statistics about gun ownership would be helpful in the Second Amendment debate, it actually makes a difference.
