New Year, New Laws
News Wrap - January 21, 2026
It’s our first News Wrap of 2026, and new developments in gun safety have already emerged across the nation. From a suite of measures by the executive branch to roll back firearms regulations, to blows to gun laws in Georgia and Florida, to a range of cases hitting the Supreme Court, the latest stories set the stage for gun safety this year. Let’s dive in.
In the Capitol, the Trump Administration has made a number of moves around gun policy over the past month.
Just before Christmas, the administration filed a lawsuit against Washington, D.C.’s Metropolitan Police Department for its ban on ownership of certain semiautomatic weapons, arguing that these are in violation of 2nd Amendment rights.
The suit follows a similar one filed against the Virgin Islands earlier in the month, and is consistent with the Trump Administration’s broader work to loosen restrictions on firearms.
With a change to federal tax rules that went into effect earlier this month, the tax stamp required with an application to buy a suppressor—also known as a silencer—can now be acquired free of charge.
They previously cost $200, which gun sellers say was enough to discourage some prospective customers.
The price change was passed last year as part of the One Big Beautiful Bill, and was the subject of aggressive lobbying by gun rights groups.
Gun safety groups argued that suppressor regulations are vital for public safety.
The DOJ last week released an opinion finding that the long-standing ban on mailing concealable firearms through the U.S. Postal Service is unconstitutional.
It says the rule violates the 2nd Amendment by making it difficult to ship or travel with firearms and directs the USPS to revise it while ceasing any further enforcement.
The move comes as a lawsuit challenging the ban plays out in the courts.
In the States
Developments in the states have more diverse implications for gun safety. Leaders in Illinois and Wisconsin are taking opposing stances on firearms regulations, as a gun safety measure with bipartisan support is going into effect in Michigan. Meanwhile, legislators in Georgia and Florida are moving to roll back their own measures.
FLORIDA: The state House has approved a bill that would lower the minimum age to purchase a long gun from 21 to 18.
The bill would reverse the minimum age increase instituted in 2018 in response to the Parkland mass shooting.
It has been the subject of fierce debate between supporters who view a lower minimum age as essential to 2nd Amendment rights and opponents pointing to the prevalence of long guns in school shootings.
97Percent research shows that among newer policies, gun owners consider a minimum age of 21 to purchase a firearm the most effective option to respond to gun concerns.
GEORGIA: The state’s legislature voted last week to block cities from requiring guns left in cars to be securely stored.
The move is in response to an ordinance by the city of Savannah, which outlawed leaving unsecured firearms in unlocked vehicles.
While its opponents worried that the ordinance unfairly targeted victims of theft, supporters of the ordinance argued that the law was aimed at enhancing public safety and contributed to significantly reduced gun theft in the city.
The bill now heads to the governor’s desk.
ILLINOIS: National leaders and gun violence prevention advocates gathered earlier this month in Chicago to rally behind the Responsibility and Firearm Legislation (RIFLE) Act recently introduced in the state’s House of Representatives.
The bill would introduce new licensing requirements for gun manufacturers, including that they pay into a “victim fund.”
Likening it to worker’s compensation, they say the fund would be used to aid victims of gun violence with such costs as medical bills.
The bill is heavily opposed by 2nd Amendment groups, but supporters hope it could serve as a model for other states working to address gun violence.
MICHIGAN: Schools across Michigan will now have the option to offer firearm and hunter safety courses as an elective course.
The courses will be taught by state-certified teachers using curriculums developed in concert with the Michigan Department of Natural Resources.
The courses are the result of a bill signed into law by the governor at the end of December—after passing in the state’s legislature with bipartisan support.
WISCONSIN: Republican lawmakers in the state’s capital considered proposals to loosen firearms restrictions earlier this month.
One legislative committee heard public testimony on a proposed bill to allow permitless carry of concealed weapons, something gun safety activists worry will threaten public safety by removing training requirements included in current permit practices.
Meanwhile, another committee debated a proposed change to the state’s constitution, which would make the right to bear arms “inalienable” and raise the legal threshold for any restrictions on it.
While the first bill faces a possible veto by the state’s Democratic governor, the latter would be subject to a public referendum but not require his approval.
In the Courts
The courts are seeing new challenges to firearms regulations already in place. Indiana cities can no longer sue to hold the firearms industry accountable. And the high court has resolved a heated legal debate and is gearing up to hear a controversial case that will determine the gun rights of millions of Americans.
INDIANA: A state appeals court has dismissed a long-running lawsuit by a local city seeking to hold firearms manufacturers and vendors accountable for the cost of gun violence to the community.
The decision reinforces a 2024 law that gives exclusive authority to the state to pursue such lawsuits, limiting the avenues local governments can use to address gun violence.
The city argues that they should have this power, particularly when gun violence exacts an oversized cost to local communities.
THE SUPREME COURT: On Wednesday, the Supreme Court ruled that charges related to overlapping federal gun statutes cannot result in multiple convictions.
The decision clarifies a debate among lower courts, with significant implications for the way in which firearms-related crimes are prosecuted.
While it has been lauded for restoring legal predictability, some observers are concerned that it limits the avenues through which prosecutors can seek justice for violent crimes.
WOLFORD v. LOPEZ: The court returns to the subject of firearms this week, as arguments are heard surrounding the validity of Hawaii’s ban on guns on private property unless explicitly permitted by the owner.
Challengers claim that the law fails to stand up to the Bruen precedent.
Hawaii argues that the law does not have to do with the 2nd Amendment, but if it did, there are comparable historical laws which justify it under the Bruen precedent.
Check out 97Percent’s recent piece on the Bruen test and its influence on gun policy.
U.S. v. HEMANI: Also on the docket is United States v. Hemani, which is set to be heard during SCOTUS’ upcoming February session.
The case will evaluate whether a federal law prohibiting users of controlled substances from possessing a gun violates the 2nd Amendment.
It’s the culmination of a years-long legal battle by Ali Danial Hemani to clear himself of charges after he was found in possession of a firearm and marijuana.
Want to catch up on this case? Take a look at 97Percent’s deep dive for the details, history, and implications behind it.
Do you have a comment about any of these critical issues? Do you have a story to share? We’d love to hear from you. Please include your first name and state, and we may publish it in a future issue. Thank you for reading!
For more information about 97Percent, please visit our website at 97Percent.us.
Join our growing community of gun owners and non-gun owners united to reduce gun deaths in America.