The Bruen Standard Changed Everything — And States Are Fighting Like Hell
Three years ago, the Supreme Court's decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (June 2022) nuked the legal framework states had been using to regulate guns. The two-step test that came out of that ruling is simple on paper: does the law burden conduct protected by the Second Amendment, and if so, can the state prove it's consistent with historical tradition? Sounds straightforward. It's been anything but.
What Bruen actually did was hand states an impossible choice. They can't hide behind "intermediate scrutiny" anymore. They can't claim public safety as a blanket justification. They have to dig into history — real history, from founding-era documents and 19th-century laws — and prove their gun restrictions match what the Framers would recognize. Most state restrictions don't. Legislatures have been scrambling to rewrite or defend their laws ever since. Some are getting away with it. Most aren't.
What States Are Winning — And It's Mostly Narrow Stuff
New York tried to save its carry licensing system by rewriting it after Bruen came down. The state dumped the "proper cause" requirement that had essentially let officials reject carry permits for any reason. They replaced it with a system that still requires licenses but applies uniform standards.
Federal courts have been split on whether the revised New York system survives Bruen, but several lower courts have upheld portions of it. The key was that New York moved toward shall-issue licensing instead of the old may-issue framework. That's a real constitutional concession, not a workaround. Federal judges noticed the difference.
California tried something similar. When Young v. Hawaii (2023) signaled that states couldn't use vague "proper cause" language to deny carry permits, California rewrote its law. The state shifted toward clearer standards for issuance. Courts have been more willing to let those survive initial reviews, though serious challenges are still pending.
The states that are actually holding ground are the ones making genuine changes to licensing schemes rather than trying to keep the old gatekeeping in different language. Connecticut's revised permit system, which moved toward clearer issuance criteria after federal court pressure, has held up better than states still playing games with discretion.
Magazine restrictions are trickier. California's 10-round magazine cap got temporarily blocked post-Bruen, then temporarily restored, and it's been in and out of federal court so many times that nobody's sure what the actual rule is right now. Same with New York's restrictions. Courts keep finding these lack historical grounding — there's no founding-era equivalent to compare them to — but then appeals delay clarity.
What States Are Losing — And Why They're Losing
The big losers are states trying to defend broad carry restrictions that contradict the Bruen standard directly.
New Jersey's carry licensing system got dismantled in Rodríguez v. San Diego County Sheriff's Department (9th Circuit, 2023) and similar rulings. The problem: New Jersey's system gave officials too much discretion. It wasn't shall-issue. It wasn't tied to clear, objective criteria. Bruen said that doesn't fly. New Jersey tried to patch it but never fully fixed the discretionary element.
Illinois has been losing repeatedly on its FOID (Firearms Owner's Identification) card system. The state required permits to own guns — not just carry them, but own them. Multiple federal courts have found that the FOID system fails Bruen scrutiny because there's no historical parallel. You couldn't require citizens to get permission from the government to own a firearm in 1791, so you can't now. Illinois keeps defending it anyway. They keep losing.
Delaware, Maryland, and Massachusetts have all had significant restrictions struck down or temporarily blocked. Maryland's good-and-substantial-reason requirement for carry permits got blocked in federal court. Delaware's "person of good repute" language for permits failed Bruen review. Massachusetts' restrictions on magazine capacity and certain semi-auto features have been challenged successfully.
Washington State — my state — has been fighting hard to defend its ban on standard-capacity magazines. Federal judges have been skeptical. The state argues public safety. Courts say Bruen doesn't allow that argument without historical grounding. As of now, the magazine ban is blocked pending appeal, but it's not settled law yet.
The pattern is clear: states lose when they try to defend discretionary licensing, vague "proper cause" standards, or restrictions with no historical analogue. They have a slightly better shot when they can point to actual founding-era or 19th-century precedent, but that's rare because gun regulations weren't that common historically.
The Workarounds States Are Trying (And Whether They Work)
Some states are getting creative. Not successfully, mostly, but creative.
Redefining "public carry": A few states have tried to argue that Bruen only protects carry in some narrow set of locations, not everywhere. Courts have rejected that hard. Bruen explicitly protects public carry outside the home.
Extreme risk protection order laws (ERPOs): Several states have passed or defended red flag laws that allow temporary gun removal based on court orders. Courts have been more tolerant of these because they involve judicial process and due process safeguards. But they're still getting challenged, and outcomes depend heavily on whether the specific law's procedure holds up. Hawaii's ERPO got partially blocked. Maryland's has survived so far, but it's under appeal.
Licensing based on training: Some states tried to repackage "proper cause" as a training requirement. Courts see through this. If the effect is to give officials discretion to deny permits to people who completed the training, it fails Bruen.
Firearm registration: A few states cling to registration schemes. Bruen didn't explicitly address registration, and lower courts have been split on whether registration survives scrutiny. But even courts skeptical of registration admit it's in legally uncertain territory post-Bruen. Some states are quietly phasing it out rather than fight in court.
The Real Picture Right Now (May 2026)
We're three years past Bruen, and the legal landscape is a mess. Here's what's actually happening:
- Carry licensing: Shall-issue is becoming standard, but judges are still fighting over what "objective standards" really means. States that moved quickly to shall-issue are faring better than those dragging their feet.
- Magazines and features: Most restrictions are blocked or in flux. Courts consistently find no historical grounding for modern capacity limits or modern features bans.
- Ownership restrictions: States requiring permits to own guns (not just carry) are losing badly. FOID-style systems are functionally dead post-Bruen, but Illinois and a couple others are still fighting.
- Permit denials: If a state still has discretion in its permitting process, courts are striking those down. The discretion is the problem. The objective criteria are what passes muster.
- Appeals and uncertainty: A lot of these cases are still in federal appeals courts. Ninth Circuit rulings aren't binding nationwide. Second Circuit interpretations of what Bruen allows differ from Fourth Circuit views. Until SCOTUS clarifies further — or until enough circuit courts align — gray areas remain.
The fundamental issue is that states designed restrictive gun laws when courts let them use intermediate scrutiny. Now courts demand strict scrutiny and historical grounding. States can't retroactively create fake historical records. They have to either genuinely move toward constitutional carry or find actual historical parallels. Most don't have either option.
Colorado, New Hampshire, and a few others have quietly moved toward constitutional carry after Bruen made licensing systems politically untenable. Others are grinding through federal courts trying to save pieces of their old frameworks.
What This Means for Gun Owners Right Now
If you own guns or carry, the Bruen standard is your baseline now. Federal courts measure state laws against it. State laws that don