The legal landscape surrounding the Second Amendment continues to evolve, and the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Wolford v. Lopez may prove to be one of the most significant developments in years. While the case itself addresses public carry on private property, its legal framework is expected to influence future decisions involving assault weapon bans, magazine capacity restrictions, suppressors, and other firearms-related regulations.
To help our customers and fellow members of the shooting community better understand these developments, we’re pleased to share this comprehensive legal analysis by John P. Mark, a retired attorney, graduate of New York University School of Law, competitive shooter, Chief Range Officer, Range Officer, and NRA-certified firearms instructor.
In this detailed paper, Mr. Mark explains the Court’s reasoning, examines how it builds upon previous landmark Second Amendment decisions, and explores what it could mean for pending cases and future firearm legislation. Whether you’re a competitive shooter, firearms enthusiast, gunsmith, or simply interested in constitutional law, you’ll find this to be an informative and thought-provoking read.
This article is provided as a resource for educational and informational purposes. The opinions and legal analysis expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of DaVinci Machining. Nothing contained herein should be construed as legal advice.
Click to Download the Full PDF
Arms, Accessories, and Historical Tradition After Wolford v. Lopez
An analysis of Wolford, Heller, Bruen, Rahimi, Hemani, and the coming assault weapon and magazine cases — John P. Mark
In June 2026, the Supreme Court struck down a Hawaii law that banned licensed concealed-carry holders from carrying on private property open to the public, such as stores and restaurants, unless the owner said yes first. The Court did not decide anything about assault weapon bans, magazine limits, or suppressors. What it did was lay out, more clearly than before, exactly how courts must analyze any gun law: first ask whether the law touches on “arms” at all, and if it does, require the government to prove the law matches a real historical tradition rather than just a modern policy preference. That methodology is what will decide the assault weapon and magazine cases the Supreme Court has now agreed to hear. This article explains the ruling and what it signals for the fights still ahead. READ MORE >>