708 F.Supp.3d 65
D. Mass.2023Background
- Plaintiffs, Joseph R. Capen and the National Association for Gun Rights, challenged Massachusetts laws prohibiting the possession, sale, and transfer of certain semiautomatic assault weapons and large-capacity magazines (LCMs).
- Capen claims he would acquire the prohibited firearms and magazines for self-defense but is deterred by the law; NAGR alleges its members are similarly affected.
- The relevant Massachusetts statute was modeled after an expired 1994 federal assault weapons ban and specifically targets certain models and weapons with military-style features and magazines holding over ten rounds.
- Plaintiffs sought a preliminary injunction to halt enforcement, arguing the ban violates the Second Amendment; the Court addressed whether plaintiffs were likely to succeed on the merits under current Second Amendment doctrine post-Bruen.
- The case was decided at the preliminary injunction stage, with both factual and expert evidence considered, but without a final trial on the merits.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Assault weapons ban violates Second Amendment | Assault weapons are in common use; bans violate self-defense rights | Prohibition targets dangerous and unusual weapons, not self-defense arms | Statute consistent with historical tradition; ban upheld |
| LCM ban violates Second Amendment | LCMs are common, necessary for self-defense | LCMs are not arms; restrictions minimally burden self-defense | Ban is consistent with historical regulations; upheld |
| Whether "common use" = protected status | Commonality (high sales) confers constitutional protection | Mere popularity is not dispositive; tradition/history controls | Common use is not solely determinative; historical tradition applied |
| Treatment of dramatic technological change/mass shootings | No change; similar weapons existed at founding | AR-15s/LCMs are modern, more lethal, enable mass shootings | Dramatic change justifies analogical reasoning from history |
Key Cases Cited
- District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (Second Amendment protects individual right to possess firearms for self-defense but allows regulation of certain types)
- McDonald v. City of Chicago, 561 U.S. 742 (Incorporates Second Amendment to states, reaffirms self-defense as core)
- Caetano v. Massachusetts, 577 U.S. 411 (Second Amendment applies to all bearable arms, modern or not)
- New York State Rifle & Pistol Ass’n v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (Rejects interest-balancing; mandates analysis by text, history, and tradition for Second Amendment claims)
- United States v. Miller, 307 U.S. 174 (Defines arms eligible for Second Amendment protection as those in common use for lawful purposes)
- Kolbe v. Hogan, 849 F.3d 114 (Upholds Maryland’s assault weapons ban after analyzing under Second Amendment)