Capen v. Campbell: First Circuit Upholds Massachusetts Assault Weapons Ban

Note: The First Circuit's April 2025 ruling addressed only a preliminary injunction. The merits of the assault weapons ban remain pending in district court. This article describes the interlocutory ruling, not a final determination on the constitutionality of the Massachusetts ban.

In April 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit issued its decision in Capen v. Campbell, 134 F.4th 660 (1st Cir. 2025), affirming the denial of a preliminary injunction against the Massachusetts assault weapons ban in a Second Amendment challenge brought in the wake of the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in NYSRPA v. Bruen^[1]. The case remains pending for full adjudication on the merits.

Background

Following the Bruen decision, which established a new framework for evaluating firearms regulations under the Second Amendment, plaintiffs challenged the Massachusetts assault weapons ban (now restructured into Sections 128^[2] and 131M^[3]) and the Attorney General's 2016 enforcement notice. They argued that the ban could not survive scrutiny under the historical tradition test articulated in Bruen.

The Court's Analysis

The First Circuit applied the Bruen framework and examined the historical tradition of firearms regulation in the United States. The court found that there is a longstanding tradition of regulating particularly dangerous weapons, dating back to colonial-era restrictions on the storage and use of gunpowder and certain weapons in populated areas.

Remand to District Court

Because the First Circuit's ruling addressed only the preliminary injunction, the case has returned to the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts for full adjudication on the merits. Discovery and briefing are underway as of early 2026.

Do not cite Supreme Court docket No. 25-566 as a Capen docket. Docket No. 25-566 is Grant v. Higgins, a Connecticut assault weapons ban case. The Supreme Court has separately signaled interest in the broader assault weapons issue. In June 2025, the Court declined to hear two related challenges, Snope v. Brown and Ocean State Tactical v. Rhode Island, but Justice Kavanaugh wrote separately to suggest that the Court "should and presumably will address the AR-15 issue soon, in the next Term or two," and Justices Thomas, Alito, and Gorsuch dissented from the denial. A future cert petition in Capen or a related case remains possible once merits proceedings conclude.^[5] On June 30, 2026, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Grant v. Higgins (No. 25-566), consolidated with Viramontes v. Cook County, agreeing to decide the constitutionality of assault weapons bans in its 2026 Term, with argument expected in the fall. Capen itself is still not before the Court, but the ruling in those cases is likely to control the fate of the Massachusetts ban.

Other Pending Cases

Several other cases challenging Massachusetts firearms laws are pending in federal and state courts:

• Hanlon v. Campbell (D. Mass., filed August 21, 2025): NRA-backed lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the assault-style firearms ban under the Second Amendment and raising a Fifth Amendment vagueness challenge. Massachusetts has asserted sovereign immunity.
• Granata v. Campbell: Challenging the EOPSS Approved Firearms Roster as unconstitutional
• Escher v. Noble (D. Mass., filed February 2025): Coalition lawsuit by SAF, NRA, GOAL, Commonwealth Second Amendment, FPC, and GOA challenging the 18-to-20-year-old handgun and semiautomatic ban under Chapter 135.
• Donnell/Marquis (Non-Resident Licensing): RESOLVED. The SJC ruled March 11, 2025, holding that the pre-Bruen "may issue" non-resident licensing scheme was unconstitutional as applied (Donnell), but that the post-Chapter 135 "shall issue" framework is constitutional (Marquis, SJC-13562). SCOTUS declined certiorari January 2026 (Docket No. 25-5280).

No Pending Cert Petition

There is no Supreme Court cert petition in Capen. Docket No. 25-566 is Grant v. Higgins, a Connecticut assault weapons ban case, not Capen. Capen returned to the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts for merits proceedings, and no cert petition has been filed.

Implications

This ruling means the Massachusetts assault weapons ban remains in full effect. Firearms classified as assault-style firearms under state law continue to be prohibited from sale, transfer, or new possession. Assault-style firearms lawfully possessed in Massachusetts on August 1, 2024 may continue to be possessed under Section 131M(b), but only by an owner holding a license to carry (or dealer's license) and only if the firearm is registered in accordance with Section 121B and serialized in accordance with Section 121C. Large capacity feeding devices lawfully possessed on September 13, 1994 remain lawful under Section 131M(c) only in specified settings (the owner's property, permitted private property, a dealer or gunsmith for repair, licensed ranges, and travel between them with the device unloaded and locked).