NEWS AND UPCOMING EVENTS

Aug. 5, 2026 — The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and its partners have filed a motion for preliminary injunction in Renna v. Bonta, its case now challenging California’s Glock ban in addition to California’s Handgun Roster.

In October last year, lawmakers in California passed Assembly Bill 1127, which expanded the already unconstitutional Unsafe Handgun Act (UHA), stating that on July 1, 2026 “…licensed firearms dealers ‘shall not sell, offer for sale, exchange, give, transfer, or deliver any semiautomatic machinegun-convertible pistol.’” It further defines a “machinegun-convertible pistol” to include handguns that contain a cruciform trigger bar, therefore banning essentially all Glock and Glock-style handguns, some of the most common firearms on the market today.

“The Supreme Court has already explicitly held that handguns are constitutionally protected, and so are any arms in common use,” said SAF Senior Director of Legal Operations Bill Sack. “So, it figures that California lawmakers chose the most commonly used handguns to ban. We’re hopeful that our two ‘assault weapons’ ban cases, which will be heard by the Supreme Court in the coming term, will address this absurd law, but we also felt it critically important to prevent this ban’s enforcement in the meantime. Hence today’s motion for a preliminary injunction.”

As noted in the motion, “California’s decision to create a new and separate ban…to prohibit additional, commonly possessed handgun models is no more constitutional than the UHA ban already enjoined by this Court. Section 27595’s cruciform-trigger-bar ban is flagrantly unconstitutional and, like the rest of the laws challenged in this suit, seeks to narrow the selection of ordinary handguns available to peaceable Californians.” SAF is joined in Renna by the National Rifle Association, Firearms Policy Coalition, San Diego County Gun Owners PAC, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and several individuals and licensed gun dealers.

“It’s no surprise that fearmongering lawmakers in California have decided to categorically ban one of the most commonly owned handgun platforms in America,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “We’ve seen these kneejerk reactions time and time again in California and have routinely fought them as the Second Amendment infringements that they are. This case is no different.”

California Democrats are used to defending gun control measures against lawsuits by Second Amendment advocates like the California Rifle and Pistol Association.

Now, the state is facing a lawsuit from the Trump administration targeting a new law restricting sales of Glock semi-automatic handguns.

Since July 1, the state has prohibited the sale of Glock handguns and various off-brand imitators that can be converted to fully automatic guns — which are already illegal under state and federal laws, with some exceptions — after inserting a converter into the gun.

The U.S. Department of Justice is challenging the law, saying it bans the sale “of the most popular handgun in America” and that it “obviously violates the Second Amendment.” California can enforce its law while the lawsuit proceeds, a judge ruled Thursday.

It’s another example of the state playing defense to protect the gun control laws it adopted in the decade after the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting.

Take, for instance:

The state is awaiting a decision in another case at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals that gutted a 2016 ballot initiative requiring background checks before ammunition purchases.
A new U.S. Supreme Court decision struck down state laws that prohibit people from carrying concealed firearms in private places, such as stores, including California’s. Writing for the majority, Justice Samuel Alito said a similar law in Hawaii “hobbles … the right of Americans to carry arms for self-defense as they go about their daily lives.”
And, the high court agreed to hear an Illinois case that could overturn California’s assault weapons ban, which limits the sale of AR-15-style rifles.

State officials are preparing to protect the new handgun law by arguing it is not a categorical ban on Glocks. Rather, they say, it directs gun makers to redesign firearms so they can no longer be easily modified into machine guns.

Proponents of gun safety also criticized the lawsuit.