The National Rifle Association, joined by the Firearms Policy Coalition, the Second Amendment Foundation, a Poway, California gun retailer, and two NRA members, filed a federal lawsuit against California Attorney General Rob Bonta in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, challenging a state law that prohibits the sale, offer for sale, exchange, transfer, or delivery of semi-automatic handguns equipped with a "cruciform trigger bar" that can be readily converted to fire automatically using devices commonly called "Glock switches" or "auto switches." The California law, Assembly Bill 1127, was signed by Governor Gavin Newsom and takes effect July 1, 2026. Fox News reported the lawsuit prominently.
The NRA argues the law is a de facto ban on some of the most popular handguns in America — particularly Glock-brand pistols, which are standard-issue for law enforcement agencies nationwide and among the most widely owned civilian handguns in the country. The plaintiffs argue the law violates the Second Amendment as interpreted by the Supreme Court in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), which requires gun laws to have a historical analog from the founding era. There is no historical analog, the NRA argues, to a law banning the sale of handguns based on their theoretical convertibility to automatic fire.
California argues the law targets a specific and rapidly emerging public safety threat: the proliferation of auto-conversion devices — illegal under federal law but increasingly available online — that can turn a standard Glock into a machine gun capable of firing 20 rounds per second. Law enforcement agencies in Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Chicago have reported a sharp increase in confiscated Glock switches in street crime, and several high-profile mass shootings and gang attacks have involved weapons equipped with the devices. California's legal team argues that the law does not ban Glocks — it bans a specific mechanical configuration that makes them convertible — and that Newsom's law represents a narrowly tailored response to a documented threat.
The NRA filed the original lawsuit in October 2025, and the case remained pending as of March 2026. Gun rights and legal observers on both sides noted the case presents a novel legal question: whether the Second Amendment protects the right to purchase a specific firearm that, while itself legal, is defined in state law by its susceptibility to an illegal modification. The case is expected to be decided under the Bruen historical-analog test, and legal analysts cited by Fox 5 San Diego and ABC 7 Los Angeles said the outcome could set significant precedent for similar convertibility-based restrictions in other states.
Left-Leaning Emphasis
- Left-leaning outlets and California's legal team frame the law as a narrowly targeted response to a documented public safety threat — Glock switches enabling machine-gun rates of fire — arguing the NRA is using Second Amendment litigation to protect guns that are effectively already illegal to modify.
- Gun violence prevention advocates note the real-world prevalence of auto switches in street crime, arguing the law is practical public safety legislation rather than ideological gun control.
Right-Leaning Emphasis
- Fox News and NRA-ILA frame the lawsuit as a constitutional defense of one of America's most popular handgun models, arguing California is effectively banning the sale of a lawful firearm based on its theoretical — not actual — convertibility.
- Conservative gun rights commentators argue the Bruen test requires California to identify a founding-era historical analog for this type of convertibility ban, which they say does not exist — making the law unconstitutional under current Supreme Court precedent.
Sources
Fox News, NRA-ILA, Fox 5 San Diego, ABC 7 Los Angeles, NRA America's 1st Freedom