A major gun law in the nation’s capital has been overturned after the District of Columbia Court of Appeals ruled that the city’s ban on firearm magazines holding more than 10 rounds violates the Second Amendment.
In a decision issued Thursday, the court reversed the conviction of Tyree Benson, who had been arrested in 2022 for possessing a handgun equipped with a 30-round magazine. The court concluded that the law used to prosecute him was unconstitutional because such magazines are widely owned by law-abiding Americans.
Writing for the majority, Judge Joshua Deahl said magazines capable of holding more than 10 rounds are “ubiquitous” across the United States, numbering in the hundreds of millions. According to the court, these magazines account for roughly half of those owned by American gun owners and come standard with many of the most commonly sold firearms.
Because of that widespread use, the majority determined the devices fall under the category of “arms in common use,” a standard that has become central to modern Second Amendment jurisprudence following recent Supreme Court decisions.
“Because these magazines are arms in common and ubiquitous use by law-abiding citizens across this country, we agree with Benson and the United States that the District’s outright ban on them violates the Second Amendment,” Deahl wrote.
The ruling had broader consequences beyond Benson’s magazine charge. Because the banned magazine prevented him from legally registering the firearm or carrying it under the city’s regulatory system, the court also overturned several related convictions tied to the case, including unlawful possession of a firearm, carrying a pistol without a license, and possession of ammunition.
Notably, federal prosecutors ultimately sided with Benson’s argument on appeal, acknowledging that the magazine ban conflicted with constitutional protections.
However, the decision was not unanimous. Chief Judge Anna Blackburne-Rigsby dissented, arguing that the majority relied too heavily on general ownership statistics without addressing whether the specific 30-round magazine at issue is commonly used for lawful self-defense.
“The statistics cited show that magazines holding 11, 15, or 17 rounds are common,” Blackburne-Rigsby wrote. “But they do not demonstrate that the particularly lethal 30-round magazine possessed in this case is commonly used for self-defense.”
The ruling adds to an ongoing national debate over so-called “large capacity” magazines. Similar bans have been enacted in several states and cities, often limiting magazine size to 10 rounds. Supporters argue the restrictions can reduce the severity of mass shootings, while critics say they infringe on constitutional gun rights.
Legal battles over these limits have intensified in recent years, especially after the Supreme Court’s 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which established a new framework requiring gun regulations to be consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.
The District of Columbia now has several options moving forward. Officials could ask the full D.C. Court of Appeals to reconsider the case or appeal the decision to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The ruling also creates an unusual legal situation because a federal appellate court previously upheld the constitutionality of the same D.C. magazine restriction. Whether the two decisions ultimately conflict could become a question for the Supreme Court to resolve.
For now, however, the decision marks a significant legal victory for gun rights advocates and raises new questions about the future of magazine-capacity limits across the United States.
