DOJ sues California over “Glock Ban” and handgun roster—what the complaint says and what happens next
On July 1, 2026, the U.S. Department of Justice filed a federal lawsuit against California and Attorney General Rob Bonta challenging the state’s newly enacted “Glock Ban” and the state’s Handgun Roster. In the complaint, DOJ argues the restrictions violate the Second Amendment (applied to states through the Fourteenth Amendment) and asks a federal court to enter declaratory and permanent injunctive relief against enforcement of the challenged provisions.
What DOJ says California is doing
DOJ alleges California’s Glock Ban makes it illegal for licensed dealers “to sell, offer for sale, exchange, give, transfer, or deliver” any semiautomatic “machinegun-convertible pistol.” The complaint describes California’s definition of that term as applying to semiautomatic pistols with a cruciform trigger bar that can be readily converted by hand or with common household tools into a machinegun by attaching a pistol converter as a replacement for the slide’s backplate—without additional engineering, machining, or modification to the trigger mechanism.
DOJ says the challenged statute is designed around commonly used Glock-style handguns, but it also states its challenge is not limited to Glock-manufactured firearms.
What DOJ challenges in the handgun “Roster”
DOJ also challenges California’s Handgun Roster rules, which limit which handguns may be sold in the state. The complaint says that, to be listed, certain handguns must have a chamber-load indicator (CLI) and a magazine-disconnect mechanism (MDM). The complaint further describes the state’s microstamping requirement for new-to-market pistols and says California postponed further implementation of that microstamping requirement until January 1, 2028—while the CLI/MDM requirements remain in effect.
Where the case was filed
DOJ filed the case in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. The complaint lists it as Case 8:26-cv-01697 and describes the action as seeking statewide relief.
DOJ’s constitutional theory
In the complaint, DOJ frames the dispute as a Second Amendment question under the Supreme Court’s modern firearms framework. DOJ argues the challenged laws burden conduct protected by the Second Amendment and that the restrictions are therefore presumptively unconstitutional under that approach.
What DOJ asks the court to do
In its prayer for relief, DOJ requests:
- A declaratory judgment and
- permanent injunctive relief enjoining California and its agents from enforcing the Glock Ban and the challenged provisions of the Handgun Roster rules.
What to watch next
Because the complaint itself seeks permanent injunctive relief, the practical next signal for readers will come from the court’s scheduling order and the parties’ upcoming filings—especially any early briefing or requests aimed at pausing enforcement while arguments on the merits are litigated.
Until a court order changes enforcement, dealers and buyers in California remain subject to the state’s Glock Ban and roster requirements described in DOJ’s complaint.
Sources
Look for updates to this story
Discover more from Interactive News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
