The Trump administration has launched a legal offensive against Colorado’s gun control measures, filing a lawsuit to overturn the state’s restrictions on large-capacity magazines. This move comes immediately after the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) sued the city of Denver over its ban on assault weapons, signaling a coordinated federal effort to dismantle local firearm restrictions in the state.
DOJ Challenges Colorado’s Magazine Limits
The lawsuit, filed by the Department of Justice on Wednesday, targets Colorado’s law that restricts magazines capable of holding more than 15 rounds of ammunition. Federal prosecutors argue that these restrictions violate the Second Amendment rights of Colorado residents.
Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon, who leads the Civil Rights Division, characterized the state’s restrictions as “political virtue signaling at the expense of Americans’ constitutional right to keep and bear arms.” Dhillon stated that the Division’s Second Amendment Section will continue to defend the rights of law-abiding citizens to possess arms that are owned by tens of millions of people nationwide.
The Path to Litigation
The legal action followed a formal warning issued by Dhillon last week. The DOJ demanded that Colorado and Denver officials voluntarily cease the enforcement of bans on large-capacity magazines and semiautomatic rifles by 5 p.m. Eastern time on Tuesday. When the officials did not comply, the department proceeded with the lawsuits.
The DOJ is asking the court to prohibit both the state of Colorado and the city of Denver from enforcing their respective bans and is requesting that they adopt new policies and procedures that align with federal interpretations of the Second Amendment.
State and City Response: “Dangerous Overreach”
Colorado officials have pushed back strongly against the federal government’s intervention. Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, a Democrat currently running for governor, described the lawsuit as a “dangerous overreach” that effectively turns the mission of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division “on its head.”
Weiser defended the magazine limits as responsible policies that save lives and decrease the impact of mass shootings while remaining consistent with Second Amendment protections. “The state has a duty to protect Colorado residents from gun violence,” Weiser said, vowing to vigorously defend the law.
Similarly, Denver City Attorney Miko Brown dismissed the DOJ’s demands as “baseless, irresponsible, and a clear overreach of the federal government’s power.”
Historical Context of Colorado’s Gun Laws
Colorado’s restrictions on magazines carrying more than 15 rounds have been in place since 2013. The law was passed by the state Legislature following the 2012 mass shooting at a movie theater in Aurora. The legality of this measure was previously tested in 2020, when the Colorado Supreme Court unanimously upheld the law in a challenge brought by Rocky Mountain Gun Owners.
In addition to the magazine ban, the state Legislature passed a law last year requiring training for anyone purchasing a semiautomatic firearm. Meanwhile, Denver has maintained a restriction on the sale and possession of assault weapons since 1989.
Key Takeaways: The DOJ vs. Colorado
- The Target: A state law banning magazines with more than 15 rounds and a city ban on assault weapons in Denver.
- The Argument: The DOJ claims these bans violate the Second Amendment; the state claims they are essential public safety measures.
- The Timeline: The DOJ filed the suits after a Tuesday deadline for voluntary compliance passed.
- Precedent: Colorado’s magazine ban was previously upheld by the state’s Supreme Court in 2020.
Conflicting Perspectives on Public Safety and Rights
The lawsuits have ignited a sharp divide between gun-rights advocates and public safety organizations.
Ian Escalante, executive director of Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, praised the DOJ’s action, claiming that Colorado has shown “disdain” for constitutional rights for a decade. He expressed hope that this would lead to the systematic undoing of the “gun control apparatus” in the state.
Conversely, Janet Carter, managing director of Second Amendment litigation at Everytown Law, called the lawsuit a “dangerous threat to public safety.” Carter argued that magazine capacity limits are “common sense” measures that prevent mass shooters from firing dozens of rounds in seconds, and she pledged to fight the DOJ’s efforts to strip communities of these tools.
Looking Ahead
These lawsuits represent a significant escalation in the conflict between federal authorities and state-level gun control efforts. As the cases move through the court system, the outcome will likely hinge on the judiciary’s interpretation of the Second Amendment and the balance between state police powers and individual constitutional rights.