The Weekly Reload Podcast

This week, we're taking a deep dive into the murky waters of National Firearms Act (NFA) mirror laws.

While an injunction has blocked enforcement of much of the NFA for a lot of people and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) has voluntarily decided not to enforce those parts for anyone, state laws may still make NFA registration necessary for many. People in states like Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland, North Carolina, and many others who want to buy silencers, short-barreled shotguns and rifles, as well as Any Other Weapons (AOWs) are directly impacted. So, we have a firearms lawyer practicing in several of those states on the show to explain the situation.

Gilbert Ambler runs a law firm that practices across several East Coast states and specializes in firearms law. He also runs The Commonwealth's Gun Rights channel on YouTube. He's handled cases involving NFA mirror laws, and he sees several issues people in states with them will face if they want to buy any of the affected NFA items.

First, Ambler said these mirror laws have historically been pretty dormant. But he agreed that they'd taken on new importance given the movement at the federal level. He said there's no clear count of how many NFA mirror laws exist since states tend to only regulate some NFA items and don't always regulate the same ones--although, he said some estimates put the number around 15.

Ambler noted that states also differ in how they word their mirror laws. Some, like Virginia, simply refer to owners needing to comply with federal law while others, like Pennsylvania, specifically say they need to comply with the NFA. But he argued the most important difference isn't necessarily in wording, but in the legal status of the owner: those directly covered by the Silencer Shop v. ATF injunction are on firmer ground when bypassing NFA registration than those only covered by the ATF's voluntary non-enforcement decision.

Special Guest: Gilbert Ambler.

Reload Reporter Julie Miller and I look at the biggest donation Everytown's Super PAC has ever received. Unsurprisingly, it came from billionaire Michael Bloomberg. The $22 million drop put Everytown into record fundraising territory. But we also looked at how polling indicates guns aren't dominating these midterms and another billionaire is putting far more money into the election. Then we discuss a new ruling striking down New York's first-of-its-kind body armor ban.

Links:

Special Guest: Julie Miller.

This week, we're previewing how gun politics may impact the upcoming midterm elections.

To do that, we have Semafor's Burgess Everett back on the show. He serves as the publication's congressional bureau chief. And he's one of the most knowledgeable political reporters out there.

He also broke news of the most recent Giffords $10 million ad buy. He said they're going after vulnerable Republicans, but not necessarily all of them. Everett said the group plans not to attack some of the remaining Republicans who backed the 2022 Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, like Maine Senator Susan Collins.

He said guns aren't playing a major role in the election on either side of the aisle, though. Democrats are focused on opposition to President Donald Trump, and many purple state candidates don't seem to feel pressure to moderate on issues like gun policy. Trump hasn't done much to tout the pro-gun accomplishments of his second term either and skipped the issue entirely during his midterm convention.

Still, the issue could tip some key races. And Everett said it's sure to get some focus in the next Congress. If Democrats do control both houses after the election, he said there's an underrated chance that they and Trump could strike a deal on some kind of gun bill--they almost did back in 2019 after all.

Special Guest: Burgess Everett .

I detail Florida's decision on how it plans to enforce, or not enforce, its National Firearms Act (NFA) mirror law. Then I discuss the National Rifle Association's new ad in the Texas Senate race. And I discribe how a new filing from the Department of Justice in a different gun-rights case says about its thoughts on the scope of the NFA injunction.

Links:

This week, we have the first interview with ATF Director Robert Cekada and Chief Counsel Robert Leider on their new guidance for how the agency will now handle the National Firearms Act (NFA).

Director Cekada and Chief Counsel Leider laid out what the process will look like for legally buying, selling, and making things like silencers, short-barrel shotguns and rifles (SBR), and Any Other Weapons (AOWs) in the wake of Silencer Shop v. ATF. They said the ATF will treat all law-abiding Americans the same under the new guidance and won't enforce the enjoined sections of the NFA against anyone regardless of whether they are technically covered by the injunction. They said for most people, depending on the state they live in, buying a silencer or SBR would now be effectively identical to buying a gun that isn't regulated by the NFA: just pass a background check and pay.

The pair also discussed what ATF expects from licensed gun dealers who sell the impacted NFA items. They said the ATF will also treat all dealers the same regardless of whether they are technically covered by the injunction. But they also said dealers will still need a Special Occupational Tax (SOT) designation to sell the items, even though they no longer need to fill out all of the traditional sales paperwork.

Cekada and Leider cautioned that neither the injunction nor the ATF's guidance impacts state law, more than a dozen of which require ATF approval for residents to possess NFA items. They said the ATF doesn't have an alternative process for granting permission to possess NFA items, but will allow people to voluntarily continue registering NFA items in order to comply with state law.

Cekada also published an open letter, and ATF released a frequently asked questions document that detail how ATF plans to handle the situation. Leider encouraged people to read those documents before reaching out to ATF for more information, but the pair also said they would be fielding more questions down the line.

Special Guests: Robert Cekada and Robert Leider.

Reload Reporter Julie Miller and I dig into the latest Federal Election Commission filings that indicate the gun money race has gotten out of hand. Then we talk about how 1.1 million silencers have been sold in 2026. And we cover the Department of Justice throwing in the towel on handgun sales to adults under 21.

Links:

Special Guest: Julie Miller.

This week, we're discussing the growing phenomenon of female gun ownership.

To dive into the demographic change and its fascinating implications, we have two academics who were involved in a new edition of the magazine Vital City that focused on women and guns. Kerri Raissian, Executive Director of Yale’s Firearm Injury Prevention Team, co-edited the wide-ranging edition. University of Kansas professor Margaret Kelley, author of A Gun of Her Own: The Everyday Lives of Women Who Shoot, wrote what I think is one of the magazine's best pieces.

They both join the show to explore the ins and outs of why women are buying more guns.

Raissian said she got a grant to put the edition together with Vital City. She said the goal was to bring a focus on the unique ways guns and gun ownership impact women. She argued women are a growing portion of gun owners, but much of the research, discussion, and even laws are focused on how men use guns.

That's where Kelley's research comes in. Her piece, an offshoot of her book, focuses on actual conversations and surveys with female gun owners. She said her evidence points to specific motivations women cite for gun ownership, primarily as an extension of their impulse to care for others, that may differ from men. She said they also tend to weigh considerations, like moral injury, very heavily.

Special Guests: Kerri Raissian and Margaret Kelley.

Reload Reporter Julie Miller and I cover the first injunction issued against a "Glock ban," which came in a Connecticut case. Then we look at growing opposition to Flock cameras among gun owners. And we discuss my critique of a New York Times report on AR-15s, which Julie provides some insider insight into since she worked there at the beginning of her career.

Links:

Special Guest: Julie Miller.

This week, we're looking at a Fourth Amendment case out of New Hampshire.

To do that, we have the Second Amendment Foundation's (SAF) Bill Sack with us to describe how his group secured a settlement with Hillsboro-Deering High School over the search of a student's car. He said school officials decided to search then-18-year-old Jack Harrington’s car for a gun despite not having permission or a good reason to believe there was one inside.

Sack said the officials concluded Harrington might have a gun because he'd told a friend on the baseball team about a traffic stop that had happened more than a week earlier. Harrington described how he'd been pulled over while legally carrying his pistol, and the stop went forward without issue. He wasn't arrested or charged or even accused of doing anything illegal, and the stop didn't happen near the school.

Sack said school officials pulled Harrington from class to demand permission to search his car after hearing about the traffic stop. He said they did not have any reason to think Harrington had brought the gun to school or any accusation that he'd made any threats to the school. Still, they pressed him to search his car.

Harrington refused to give permission for the search, but the school officials conducted it anyway. Sack said they found there was no gun in the car. That's where the SAF suit came in. They helped Harrington sue, alleging the school violated his Fourth Amendment rights. The school settled and admitted the search was illegal, which Sack said SAF plans to use as a bulwark against similar situations around the country.

Special Guest: Bill Sack.

In a shortened and early update, I detail the Ninth Circuit's decision to uphold novel Hawaiian gun-buying restrictions by using a "carve-out" it identified in the Supreme Court's Bruen decision. Then I explain the latest poll to look at what Americans think the Supreme Court should do in its upcoming AR-15 case. I also discuss an interesting argument that the Court should look at Revolutionary-Era privateers for answers on that case. And I cover the Department of Justice's new opinion on handgun sales to 18-to-20-year-olds.

Links: