DOJ Asks Court to Vacate Man’s Conviction of ‘High Capacity’ Magazine Possession in Washington, DC

In a filing in the DC Court of Appeals last month in a criminal matter, the United States moved to vacate the appellant’s conviction under D.C. Code § 7-2506.01(b) for possession of a large capacity ammunition feeding device, because “[i]t is the United States’s position that § 7-2506.01(b) is unconstitutional.” The DOJ also says they would not charge a similarly situated defendant today.

The motion notes that the District of Columbia still maintain that its “high capacity” magazine ban is constitutional, though they didn’t oppose this particular dismissal in this individual case.

The United States, though, has changed its position and “will no longer defend D.C. Code § 7-2506.01(b), which bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices, against a Second Amendment challenge.”

The Trump administration and the DOJ have gotten a lot of flack from gun owners and gun orgs for not being sufficiently pro-Second Amendment. Some of that is merited, some of it is not. I am a bit sour they pushed Hemani, the marijuana case, to the front of the cert line, but I have a hard time getting angry about their NFA defense given that I never expected them to side with us on that.

But let’s not miss the forest for the trees here. No administration has ever acknowledged that magazine bans are unconstitutional before. This is absolutely unprecedented. We knew they took this position in civil cases based on their amicus briefs in the 7th and 3rd circuits, but this is further confirmation that they are also taking the same position even in criminal cases.

We actually have it pretty good right now overall. We should continue to keep them honest, but let’s also not fall for the constant online rage farming.

 

Kostas Moros is Director of Legal Research and Eduction for the Second Amendment Foundation. This post was adapted by SNW tweets he posted at X.