Is California Trying to Moot DOJ’s Lawsuit Challenging Glock Ban?

For years, the only Glocks on California’s roster of handguns allowed to be sold in the state were older models that were grandfathered in. Those models, though, have all been designated by the state’s Department of Justice as “machinegun-convertible pistols,” and as such dealers generally have not been able to sell, transfer, or deliver them since the state’s ban on striker-fired pistols took effect on July 1. 

This week, though, CalDOJ approved the Glock 43X CA, a California-compliant semi-automatic 9mm pistol that has not been deemed a “machinegun-convertible pistol.” Shortly thereafter, Attorney General Rob Bonta informed the federal judge overseeing the federal DOJ’s lawsuit challenging the ban that there’s now one Glock that’s available for sale in the state. 

Why add in one particular model? Well, one highly plausible theory is that Bonta is hoping to moot the DOJ litigation. California can’t have implemented a Glock ban if there’s a Glock that’s available for sale, after all. Right?

Pretty strong evidence that their approval may have been motivated by trying to moot this lawsuit. From what I heard, Judge Almadani had some surprisingly tough questions for CADOJ (not that that necessarily means she’d rule against them).

The big question still remaining is… https://t.co/qRHCrIYWag

— Kostas Moros (@MorosKostas) September 30, 2026

Pretty strong evidence that their approval may have been motivated by trying to moot this lawsuit. From what I heard, Judge Almadani had some surprisingly tough questions for CADOJ (not that that necessarily means she’d rule against them). The big question still remaining is whether all redesigned Glocks will sail through, or if CADOJ is treating the slimline Glocks differently than the regular ones. The slimlines never had the same prevalence of illegal switches. The law isn’t written for that to matter, but who knows if CADOJ thinks it matters.

The typical “switch” that illegally converts a striker-fired pistol from semi-automatic to a full automatic might not work on a 43X because of its slimmer design, but that doesn’t automatically mean that the 43X CA is no longer “readily convertible” under California’s definition. It’s worth noting that CalDOJ hasn’t said what makes the 43X CA acceptable, even when it pointed the federal judge to its availability. 

I’d love to know why CalDOJ has given the green light to the 43X CA, but I think it’s also important to know how many other models Glock has recently submitted to the agency for approval. If the company has produced a half-dozen models that it believes are California-compliant but CalDOJ has approved only one for sale, that would lend credence to the idea that Attorney General Rob Bonta is trying to moot the lawsuit. If Glock has only submitted the California version of the 43X, though, then it’s a little more complex. Is Bonta trying to moot the ongoing litigation, is Glock trying to gain (or retain) market share in the most populous state in the nation, or both? 

Bonta, Gavin Newsom, and California Democrats in the legislature have operated with such bad faith when it comes to our Second Amendment rights that it’s not only understandable but commendable to treat their actions with suspicion and skepticism, even when gun owners nominally stand to benefit. They haven’t earned the benefit of the doubt, but I don’t think we can say with certainty that the recent approval of the 43X CA is all about mooting the legal challenges to the state’s broader ban on Glocks and other striker-fired pistols. 

Editor’s Note: The radical Left will stop at nothing to enact their extreme gun control agenda and strip us of our Second Amendment rights.

Help us continue to report on and expose the Democrats’ gun-grabbing schemes. Join Bearing Arms VIP and use promo code FIGHT to receive 60% off your membership.