Delaware’s Homemade-Gun Ban Fails Bruen. The Printer Ban Does Not.
Judge Maryellen Noreika granted summary judgment in part in Rigby v. Jennings. Possession and self-manufacture of unserialized firearms are unconstitutional. Selling the kit and emailing the CAD file still stand.
- Memorandum opinion in Rigby v. Jennings, C.A. No. 21-1523 (MN): Judge Maryellen Noreika. Plaintiffs: John Rigby, Alan Knight, FPC. Defendant: AG Kathy Jennings.
- Unconstitutional: possession and manufacturing/assembly of unserialized firearms and unfinished frames/receivers (11 Del. C. §§ 1459A, 1463). Permanent-injunction factors met; order to follow.
- Surviving: commercial distribution ban and the CAD/3D-print instructions ban.
- Prior PI: 630 F. Supp. 3d 602 (D. Del. 2022) — possession and manufacture preliminarily enjoined; distribution and instructions not.
- This is a mixed summary-judgment opinion, not a total win and not a Third Circuit ruling.
U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika issued a memorandum opinion in Rigby v. Jennings, C.A. No. 21-1523 (MN) (D. Del.). John Rigby, Alan Knight, and the Firearms Policy Coalition sued Delaware Attorney General Kathy Jennings over H.B. 125 — Delaware’s “ghost gun,” unfinished-frame, and 3D-print regime, codified at 11 Del. C. §§ 1459A and 1463. In 2022 the court preliminarily enjoined the possession ban and the manufacturing and assembly ban, and denied a preliminary injunction on the distribution and instructions bans. Rigby v. Jennings, 630 F. Supp. 3d 602 (D. Del. 2022). The new opinion grants summary judgment in part.
The possession ban is unconstitutional facially and as applied. Untraceable firearms and unfinished frames and receivers are “Arms.” The ban applies to “the people,” concerns Arms, and restricts “keeping” them, so it fails Bruen step one. At step two, Delaware offered historical laws on clubs, Bowie knives, slungshots, and gunpowder storage. The Third Circuit had already rejected those analogues in ANJRPC (2026). Delaware did not carry its burden.
The manufacturing and assembly ban falls with it. The right to keep and bear includes a right to acquire. An outright ban on self-manufacture cuts that off. The court noted a different statute — serialize existing homemade guns, or serialize future ones after manufacture — might survive. A ban does not.
The distribution ban stands. It regulates commercial sale, not keeping or bearing, and the record did not show it cuts off parts for self-manufacture. The instructions ban, challenged under the First Amendment, also stands. Following the Third Circuit’s 2026 Defense Distributed decision, computer code is not automatically protected speech.
Noreika found the permanent-injunction factors met for the unconstitutional bans. An appropriate order follows. This is not a clean sweep. Delaware can still police the dealer counter and the file. The homemade pistol in the safe is the part that lost.
"Delaware may not ban the homemade pistol. It still claims the kit on the shelf and the file on the drive."← More Stories
Comments
Share your take. Name is public; state is optional. Be civil — spam is removed.
Loading comments…