Please Follow us on Gab, Minds, Telegram, Rumble, Gettr, Truth Social, Twitter, YouTube, Instagram

Public Act 26-41, the “convertible pistol” ban Governor Ned Lamont signed on May 26 and Democrats sold as commonsense gun safety, was supposed to take effect today. It didn’t. Late Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Kari A. Dooley granted preliminary injunctions in the twin lawsuits brought by Glock, Inc. and by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, Shadow Systems, and Wallingford’s Blue Trail Range. The decision bars the state from enforcing the sales ban while the cases proceed.

The order landed in Glock, Inc. v. Griffin, No. 3:26-cv-01525, and National Shooting Sports Foundation Inc. v. Griffin, No. 3:26-cv-01528. A separate injunction order was to follow. The law is not permanently struck down, but the judge indicated the plaintiffs are likely to win.

State Rep. Craig Fishbein, who opposed the bill on the House floor, put it more plainly.

“This year, Connecticut passed the ‘Glock Ban,’ ostensibly banning certain handguns from being marketed for sale. Democrat proponents heralded this as a good thing, while Republicans in opposition claimed the law to be unConstitutional,” Fishbein wrote. He reminded readers of what he said in debate: all laws are deemed constitutional until a court says otherwise. “Today, the federal court has spoken, facially decreeing it as unConstitutional and preventing its use in Connecticut. It’s RAINING CONSTITUTION in Connecticut.”

The ruling is a preliminary injunction, not a final judgment. On this record, though, Dooley found the statute presumptively unconstitutional under the Second Amendment and said the state had not carried its burden.

What the law actually did

House Bill 5043, now Public Act 26-41, invented a category called the “convertible pistol”: a semiautomatic handgun with a cruciform trigger bar that can be readily converted, by hand or with a common household tool, into a machine gun by installing a “pistol converter”—the illegal auto-sear already known as a Glock switch. Knowingly importing, advertising, selling, offering, or exposing for sale a covered pistol manufactured on or after October 1 was a Class D felony, carrying up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine.

There was no law enforcement carve-out, even though Glock-pattern pistols are standard issue for Connecticut state troopers and most municipal departments. Possession of an actual switch was already a federal crime. The new statute went after the gun itself.

Dooley applied the Supreme Court’s framework from New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. Step one asks whether the law implicates the plain text of the Second Amendment. For purposes of the motion, the state conceded that it does. That concession, the judge wrote, renders the statute “presumptively unconstitutional.”

The burden then shifted to Connecticut to show the ban fits the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. The state pointed to old “proving” laws that required inspection and proof marks before a gun could be sold, and to the tradition of regulating machine guns. Dooley was not persuaded. Proving laws checked a firearm at the point of sale; they did not ban an entire design because someone might later commit a separate crime with an already-illegal part. She also noted the date trick at the heart of the statute: the state never explained why a pistol manufactured on September 30 needed no new safety regulation, while the same pistol manufactured 24 hours later was dangerous enough to ban.

“Defendants have not met their burden of demonstrating that the statute is consistent with our nation’s history of firearms regulation,” Dooley wrote. Plaintiffs had shown a likelihood of success on the Second Amendment claim, irreparable harm if enforcement began, and that the balance of equities and the public interest favored keeping the status quo.

Democrats are upset.

“I’m disappointed by this ruling. We passed a commonsense law: you should not be able to turn a handgun into a machine gun with a simple piece of plastic. Closing this loophole in our gun regulations is not only widely supported, but also desperately wanted by Connecticut residents,” Governor Lamont said.

Senate President Martin Looney and Senate Majority Leader Bob Duff went further in a two-part statement posted by the Senate Democratic caucus: “A switch turns a handgun into a machine gun. That’s not a Second Amendment right. We’ll keep fighting in court to keep our communities and police officers safe from dangerous and deadly overpowered firearms.” They added: “A Trump-appointed judge’s tortured interpretation of the Second Amendment won’t deter us from our sworn constitutional responsibility to protect our citizens.”

Attorney General William Tong, who in September promised to “aggressively defend” what he called "lawful and lifesaving" laws, said after the ruling that Connecticut does not agree with the court and will be "evaluating all legal options" to continue to defend the statute.

State Sen. Rob Sampson, who voted no, said he was encouraged. “The law was poorly conceived, difficult to apply fairly, and targeted lawful firearms based on what a criminal might illegally do with them.”

Happy Glocktober

Gun advocates welcomed the ruling. The Connecticut Citizens Defense League called the injunction a monumental win and congratulated Glock, NSSF, Shadow Systems, and Blue Trail Range, noting there would be no ban on October 1. CCDL also pointed ahead to the December 2 oral argument at the U.S. Supreme Court in its challenge to the state’s so-called assault-weapons ban.

The memes wrote themselves. Several circulating Wednesday night congratulated Lamont on an unofficial new title: Glock Salesman of the Year. They're not wrong. Nothing moves inventory like a deadline that collapses.

‘NO AD’ subscription for CDM!  Sign up here and support real investigative journalism and help save the republic!'