admin
A federal judge just handed a clear win to Second Amendment defenders. United States District Judge Maryellen Noreika ruled in Rigby et al. v. Jennings that major portions of Delaware’s 2021 “ghost gun” law are unconstitutional and issued a permanent injunction against key parts of the statute. In plain language the court wrote, “An untraceable firearm is an Arm under the Second Amendment,” and that short sentence cuts through the spin politicians used to criminalize home manufacture and possession.
What the ruling actually did
Judge Noreika’s memorandum opinion, issued on September 10, 2026, struck down two main parts of Delaware’s H.B. 125: the Possession Ban that made possession of so‑called “untraceable” firearms a crime, and the Manufacturing and Assembly Ban that criminalized privately making or using 3‑D printers to create firearms or major components. The court found those provisions run afoul of the Second Amendment under the Supreme Court’s Bruen framework. Not everything in the law fell — the court left intact licensing and serialization rules for commercial distribution and a ban on distributing digital files for 3‑D guns.
Why this decision matters
Simple constitutional principles, big practical effects
This ruling does two important things. First, it recognizes that frames, receivers and homemade guns qualify as “Arms” protected by the Constitution — not some fringe loophole. Second, it protects the act of self‑manufacture as an avenue of acquiring arms for lawful purposes like self‑defense. That combination will matter in courts across the country as judges sort out post‑Bruen questions about what states may lawfully ban. Expect the Delaware Department of Justice and Attorney General Kathy Jennings to weigh an appeal, and expect this decision to become a key citation in the fight over ghost‑gun rules.
Who’s right and who’s playing politics
Make no mistake: politicians who labeled private, unserialized components “ghost guns” used a catchy phrase to paper over an overreaching law. Criminalizing ordinary people for tinkering at home or owning a non‑serialized receiver is authoritarian in tone if not in intent. That said, the court carefully left room for regulation of commercial sales and for controls on spreading digital blueprints — so this isn’t a lawless result. The ruling rebukes overbroad criminal bans while acknowledging legitimate regulatory space. Still, if you believe in limited government and the text of the Constitution, this opinion is welcome and long overdue.
Bottom line: a win, but not the end of the fight
Celebration is warranted but cautious. Rigby v. Jennings is a substantial Second Amendment victory that protects private manufacture and possession of untraceable firearms from state criminal penalties. Yet the split outcome — parts struck and parts upheld — guarantees more litigation and likely an appeal. Conservatives should cheer Judge Noreika’s clear application of constitutional text and history, but also stay ready: the court of appeals will get the next word, and the political class will keep swinging for new restrictions. For now, the Constitution held, and that deserves a nod — and a little smug satisfaction.
