Florida AG Declares State Bump-Stock Ban Unconstitutional, Refuses to Defend Convictions

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier has declared the state’s eight-year-old bump-stock ban unconstitutional under the Second Amendment and announced that his office will no longer defend convictions obtained under the law.

In a November 13, 2026, legal opinion addressing Florida Statutes § 790.222, Uthmeier concluded that the state’s prohibition on bump-fire stocks cannot be reconciled with the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

“After careful consideration, I have determined that it does,” Uthmeier wrote in response to whether the prohibition violates the Second Amendment.

The determination puts Florida’s chief legal officer squarely against a gun-control measure enacted by the Republican-controlled Legislature and signed by then-Governor Rick Scott following the 2018 shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland.

Eight years later, Florida gun owners are still facing potential felony convictions for possessing firearm accessories that the state’s own Attorney General now says are constitutionally protected.

People are being arrested and prosecuted under a 2018 law that banned “bump stocks.”

As currently written, the overly broad law appears to restrict the use of trigger enhancements used by firearms owners for lawful purposes, subjecting them to five years in prison.

Today, my office issued a legal opinion recognizing the law as unconstitutional under the Second Amendment, and this office will not defend a conviction under the statute going forward.

— Attorney General James Uthmeier (@AGJamesUthmeier) November 13, 2026

Florida’s 2018 Bump-Stock Ban Makes Possession a Felony

Florida’s bump-stock prohibition was enacted as part of the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Public Safety Act, Senate Bill 7026.

The legislation imposed several new restrictions on law-abiding gun owners, including the controversial prohibition on firearm purchases by adults younger than 21 and the state’s bump-stock ban.

Under § 790.222, importing, transferring, distributing, selling, possessing, or giving another person a bump-fire stock is a third-degree felony, punishable by up to five years in prison. But the statute’s reach extends beyond conventional bump stocks.

Florida lawmakers defined a bump-fire stock to include a conversion kit, tool, accessory, or device that alters a firearm’s rate of fire to mimic automatic fire or increases the rate of fire beyond what a person could accomplish without the accessory.

That sweeping language raises concerns about firearm accessories and trigger enhancements that have legitimate sporting and recreational applications, including forced reset triggers and selectors.

In his November 13 announcement on X, Uthmeier said Floridians continue to face arrests and prosecutions under the prohibition.

“The overly broad law appears to restrict the use of trigger enhancements used by firearms owners for lawful purposes, subjecting them to five years in prison,” Uthmeier stated.

A law-abiding gun owner should not face a felony conviction simply because legislators decided that an otherwise lawful firearm accessory was politically unacceptable.

Uthmeier Says Florida’s Ban Fails the Supreme Court’s Second Amendment Test

Uthmeier’s constitutional analysis relies on the framework established by the U.S. Supreme Court in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.

Under Bruen, when the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the government must demonstrate that its restriction is consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. That framework presents a serious problem for Florida’s bump-stock prohibition.

According to Uthmeier’s opinion, semiautomatic firearms equipped with bump stocks and similar modifications “are bearable arms covered by the Second Amendment’s plain text.”

The Attorney General also concluded:

“No identifiable historical tradition justifies prohibiting their possession and use by law-abiding citizens for sporting, defensive, or other lawful purposes.”

The opinion further cites the Supreme Court’s 2024 decision in Garland v. Cargill, which struck down the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ federal rule classifying bump stocks as machine guns.

In Cargill, the justices concluded that a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock does not become a machine gun under the federal statutory definition because the firearm still discharges only one round per function of the trigger.

The accessory facilitates faster firing, but it does not eliminate the separate trigger functions necessary to discharge each round.

Importantly, Cargill addressed ATF’s authority under federal law rather than directly deciding whether state bump-stock prohibitions violate the Second Amendment.

Uthmeier’s opinion goes further, arguing that Florida’s prohibition itself cannot survive constitutional scrutiny under Bruen.

The federal government cannot simply redefine semiautomatic firearms as machine guns to circumvent Congress, and state lawmakers cannot escape constitutional scrutiny by broadly prohibiting firearm accessories they dislike.

Florida AG Will Not Defend Bump-Stock Convictions

The most consequential portion of Uthmeier’s opinion is his conclusion that Florida officials cannot constitutionally enforce the prohibition.

“Section 790.222 therefore violates the Second Amendment and cannot be lawfully enforced by Executive Branch officials in Florida. This Office will not defend a conviction under section 790.222.”

That is a remarkable position for Florida’s Attorney General to take against an existing state criminal statute.

Rather than defending a law simply because it remains on the books, Uthmeier has determined that the Constitution takes precedence over the Legislature’s decision to criminalize the possession of these accessories.

However, the announcement does not automatically repeal § 790.222 or invalidate existing convictions.

The Florida Attorney General’s published policy on legal opinions makes clear that such opinions are advisory and do not bind courts.

Florida’s bump-stock prohibition remains part of state law until lawmakers repeal it or a court issues a binding ruling invalidating it. Uthmeier’s decision also does not independently establish that local prosecutors will stop pursuing cases under the statute.

Gun owners should understand that distinction rather than assume the prohibition has already disappeared.

Florida Lawmakers Must Finish the Job

Uthmeier’s latest determination raises an obvious question: Why should Florida continue maintaining a criminal prohibition that its own Attorney General has declared unconstitutional?

The answer should not depend on whether a particular firearm accessory is popular, practical, or widely owned.

The Second Amendment protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms. It does not grant politicians unlimited authority to decide which otherwise lawful firearms and accessories Americans are permitted to possess.

Florida’s 2018 bump-stock ban was enacted during a politically charged moment, when lawmakers chose additional firearm restrictions rather than respecting the constitutional limits on their authority.

Now, eight years later, the state’s chief legal officer has publicly rejected the prohibition and announced that his office will not defend convictions obtained under it.

That is a significant development for Florida gun owners, but it is not the end of the matter.

The Florida Legislature should repeal § 790.222 rather than leave gun owners exposed to a felony statute that the Attorney General has concluded violates their constitutional rights.

A constitutional right should not depend on the willingness of one Attorney General to defend it. Florida’s lawmakers created this problem. They should remove the unconstitutional prohibition from the books.

About Duncan Johnson:

Duncan Johnson is a lifelong firearms enthusiast and unwavering defender of the Second Amendment—where “shall not be infringed” means exactly what it says. A graduate of George Mason University, he enjoys competing in local USPSA and multi-gun competitions whenever he’s not covering the latest in gun rights and firearm policy. Duncan is a regular contributor and editor-in-chief for AmmoLand News and is responsible for AmmoLand’s daily gun-rights reporting and industry coverage.