DOJ Files Two Suits in 48 Hours to Challenge Anti-2A Policies in Colorado
The Department of Justice just did something remarkable.
In the span of 48 hours, it filed lawsuits against both the City of Denver's assault weapon ban and Colorado's magazine capacity restrictions.
For gun owners across the country, this is a headline worth paying attention to. Still, we must be vigilant. Headlines fade, and the hard truth is that a political win today can become a legal loss tomorrow if the strategy behind it isn't built to last.
At Right To Bear, we believe in being honest with our members. So let's talk about what this actually means, what the risks are, and why your individual commitment to protecting Second Amendment rights matters more right now than at almost any point in recent memory.
What the DOJ Is Actually Suing Over
United States v. City and County of Denver (Case No. 1:26-cv-01929)
This suit targets Denver's 1989 ordinance making it a crime to carry, store, keep, manufacture, sell, or otherwise possess so-called "assault weapons" within city limits.
The DOJ's complaint is direct about the language from the start. It notes that "assault weapon" is not a technical firearms industry term but a political one, developed specifically to expand the category of regulated firearms as broadly as possible.
On the merits, the argument is simple: tens of millions of law-abiding Americans own AR-15 style rifles for lawful purposes including home defense, recreational shooting, and hunting.
Banning a firearm that common is presumptively unconstitutional under Bruen. The DOJ is asking the court to permanently enjoin Denver from enforcing the ordinance.
United States v. State of Colorado (Case No. 1:26-cv-01950)
This suit targets Colorado's ban on magazines capable of holding more than 15 rounds.
The DOJ opens by rejecting the law's own terminology. Calling these "large capacity" magazines is a misnomer, the complaint argues, because they are standard capacity for many of the most popular firearms in America, including the AR-15.
At least 448 million such magazines are currently in lawful circulation nationwide. Colorado itself previously stipulated in earlier litigation that these magazines existed in the millions within the state before the ban took effect.
The government's position is straightforward: you cannot criminalize possession of something that hundreds of millions of law-abiding Americans already own and use.
Real 2A Progress in the Rockies
Let's start with what deserves genuine recognition.
The DOJ's new Second Amendment Section filing suit against hardware bans in Colorado is the most aggressive federal legal intervention on behalf of gun owners we have seen in a long time. The federal government, with all of its institutional credibility and legal resources, is now formally on record arguing that AR-15 bans and magazine restrictions violate the Second Amendment.
That matters.
Federal judges pay attention when the DOJ walks into a courtroom. The legal arguments gun-rights organizations have been advancing for years now carry the weight of the United States government behind them. In the Tenth Circuit, which has no controlling precedent on assault weapon or magazine bans, there is a real opportunity to build favorable case law in territory that has not yet been closed off by bad rulings.
We are not dismissing that. We are encouraged by it, but encouragement without clear eyes is not a strategy. It is hope, and hope alone has never protected a constitutional right.
See Also: Colorado Gun Laws
Here Is What Concerns Us
Constitutional litigation is slow. Anyone who has followed Second Amendment cases through the courts knows that preliminary injunctions, appeals, en banc reviews, and eventual Supreme Court petitions can take the better part of a decade. The Trump administration's term ends in January 2029. Even on an aggressive timeline, it is genuinely difficult to see either of these Colorado lawsuits producing binding Supreme Court precedent before that clock runs out.
That is not cynicism. That is math.
The DOJ's Second Amendment Section exists because of a 2025 executive order. Executive orders can be reversed. Lawsuits that are brought through executive direction can be voluntarily dismissed by a successor administration that sees things differently.
If the White House changes hands in 2029, or the midterms swing left, before these cases reach their conclusion, there is every reason to believe a new administration simply walks away from them. No precedent. No Supreme Court ruling. Just the status quo, except with a little more disappointment baked in.
There is also the question of the Tenth Circuit itself. It is not the Ninth Circuit, and that is something to keep in mind, but it is not a reliably gun-friendly court either. Adverse rulings at the circuit level, combined with a change in administration, could produce a scenario nobody in the gun-rights community wants: new bad precedent, no appeal, and no correction from the Supreme Court.
Why This Makes Grassroots Commitment More Important, Not Less
Here is the part that does not get said enough: The DOJ's involvement is best understood as a political and rhetorical accelerant, not a permanent legal solution. It elevates the issue nationally, it puts pressure on judges and elected officials, and it lends credibility to arguments that gun-rights advocates have been making for years.
The legal fight for the Second Amendment has never been and will never be something that a single administration can win on its own. Administrations change. Executive orders get reversed. Political winds shift. What endures is the organized, committed, well-funded network of individuals, organizations, and legal advocates who show up regardless of who is in the White House.
A network RTB is proud to be part of
Recently, we joined the amicus brief in the case of a man sentenced to twenty years for possessing items the government's own experts said could not fire a projectile. We did that because it was the right thing to do, not because it was politically convenient.
When we stand alongside the National Association for Gun Rights and Palmetto State Armory to ask the Supreme Court to take up a case involving inert relics and demilitarized surplus, we do it because our members deserve an organization that fights in the courts consistently, not just when it generates favorable press coverage.
The DOJ's Colorado suits are important. So is every Supreme Court petition sitting on the justices' desks right now. The fight is happening on multiple fronts simultaneously, and the side that maintains its commitment across all of them is the side that wins the long game.
See Also: What Is an Amicus Brief and Why It Matters for Gun Owners
What the Supreme Court Actually Needs to See
Justice Brett Kavanaugh has signaled that the Court will likely need to address AR-15 bans within the next term or two. The Colorado cases, if they produce a circuit ruling, could provide exactly the kind of circuit percolation the justices are waiting for before granting certiorari. A new circuit, a fresh set of facts, and the federal government's formal position on the record could be the combination that finally moves the Court to act.
This only matters if the cases get there, and they only get there if the legal, financial, and organizational infrastructure to carry them is still standing when the moment arrives.
Right To Bear’s Commitment to You
Right To Bear was built for exactly this kind of moment. Not just to provide legal protection after a self-defense incident, though we do that too, but to be part of the broader ecosystem of organizations that keeps Second Amendment rights defended in courtrooms, legislatures, and communities across all fifty states, regardless of who controls the executive branch.
The DOJ's move in Colorado is a sprint. Protecting the Second Amendment is a marathon. We intend to be running when it matters most.
If you believe the fight for your rights is worth more than a favorable news cycle, we want you with us.
Learn more about the benefits of a Right To Bear membership today and find out how membership puts you inside the fight, not just watching it from the outside. Joining with us means joining a membership organization that fights hard every day to protect your legal rights after a self-defence incident and the broader 2A movement.