logo
How Rhode Island finally pushed a partial assault weapons ban over the finish line

How Rhode Island finally pushed a partial assault weapons ban over the finish line

PROVIDENCE, R.I. (AP) — Passing a new law restricting assault weapons took Rhode Island lawmakers more than 10 years, but it may offer a road map to other states looking to ease the proliferation of such firearms.
For advocates, the fight is a prime example of the current challenges to passing gun control measures in the U.S., particularly surrounding semiautomatic rifles that have become the weapon of choice among those responsible for most of the country's devastating mass shootings.
When Rhode Island's bill was signed into law by Democratic Gov. Dan McKee late last month, its sponsor, Democratic Rep. Jason Knight, told jubilant supporters: 'What was once the impossible became the inevitable.'
How? Persistent advocacy, a change in legislative leadership and a last-minute overhaul to note the broader legal landscape.
What did Rhode Island do?
Rhode Island's ban, which goes into effect in 2026, prohibits the sale, manufacturing and distribution of certain high-powered firearms that were once banned nationwide. The law does not prohibit possessing such weapons, a key distinction compared with other assault weapon bans enacted elsewhere in the U.S.
Currently, only Washington state has a similar law.
The assault weapons ban got a much-needed boost from Senate President Valerie Lawson, who secured the Senate's top spot in the middle of session after her predecessor, Sen. Dominick Ruggiero, died in April. Lawson turned to the bill's sponsors and others to find common ground between lawmakers in the House and Senate who remained split on how far the law should go.
Lawson's endorsement was seen as critical to securing the bill's passage, whereas Ruggiero had previously deferred action, pointing instead to the need for Congress to act rather than a state Legislature taking the lead.
'There are issues at certain points that meet the moment,' Lawson said. 'I think it was the time for this."
Gun control advocates also acknowledged that banning assault weapons in Rhode Island hadn't previously been a top priority given that the state has largely been spared from national high-profile shootings that sometimes help propel legislative change.
Assault weapons bans consistently face court challenges
In the U.S., just 11 states and Washington D.C. have some sort of prohibition on certain high-powered firearms that were once banned nationwide. Rhode Island's version is the only one not yet facing a constitutional challenge — though a lawsuit against it is all but assured.
Certain state legal battles are on hold until others make their way through lower federal courts. To date, none of the lawsuits have been completely thrown out, but the U.S. Supreme Court is expected to have the final say.
As Rhode Island lawmakers were in the middle of their gun debate, the high court declined to hear a challenge to Maryland's assault weapons ban — a move that some of the more conservative justices opposed. Justice Brett Kavanaugh even signaled that laws banning assault weapons are likely unconstitutional.
'Opinions from other Courts of Appeals should assist this Court's ultimate decision making on the AR–15 issue,' Kavanaugh wrote, referencing a popular style of high-powered rifle.
Yet the legal focus on banning such weapons often hinges on possessing firearms such as AR-15-style rifles and AK-47s, rather than on the distribution process. Rhode Island lawmakers hope that by tailoring their assault weapons ban to sales, manufacturing and distribution, they might will bypass the thorniest legal questions raised by the Second Amendment.
What other states are doing
Attempts to expand Democratic-dominated Hawaii's assault weapons ban to rifles in addition to pistols stalled this year. In New Mexico, Democratic lawmakers who control the General Assembly adjourned without taking up an assault weapon ban.
In Rhode Island, advocates say their work isn't over.
'It's progress,' said Melissa Carden, executive director of the Rhode Island Coalition Against Gun Violence. 'But we know that a true assault weapons ban includes an enforceable ban on possession as well."
Defenders of Rhode Island's law bristle that their version could be considered weak. They point out that residents looking to purchase an assault weapon from nearby New Hampshire or elsewhere will be blocked. That's because federal law prohibits people from traveling to a different state to purchase a gun and returning it to a state where that particular of weapon is banned.
'Some of my constituents have already called me and made comments about 'bad, bad bad, I'm going out and buying three and four of them now,'' said Sen. Louis DiPalma, the Senate sponsor of the statute. 'Okay, come July 1st next year, you will not be able to do that anymore.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Top EU officials head to Moldova for key summit ahead of a pivotal parliamentary election
Top EU officials head to Moldova for key summit ahead of a pivotal parliamentary election

Associated Press

time27 minutes ago

  • Associated Press

Top EU officials head to Moldova for key summit ahead of a pivotal parliamentary election

BUCHAREST, Romania (AP) — The European Union's top officials will travel to Moldova's capital on Friday for a key bilateral summit to strengthen ties months before the EU candidate member holds a pivotal parliamentary election. Moldova's pro-Western President Maia Sandu and Prime Minister Dorin Recean will host the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and Council President António Costa in Chisinau. Talks will focus on EU membership, security and trade. The leaders are expected to issue a joint statement afterward. Brussels agreed to open accession negotiations with Moldova for EU membership last year after granting official candidate status in June 2022, the same day as neighboring Ukraine. Some observers say Hungary's opposition to Ukraine's EU membership could hamper Moldova's progress, since both countries' applications are being processed concurrently. 'Moldova is now at the most advanced stage of European integration in its modern history,' said Daniel Voda, Moldova's government spokesperson. 'The path toward the EU has become clear, irreversible, and politically embraced at the highest level.' Brussels is keen to reaffirm its commitment to Moldova joining the 27-nation bloc with the approach of a parliamentary election Sep. 28. Allegations continue to circulate about Russia conducting a 'hybrid war' against the former Soviet republic by interfering in elections and spreading disinformation. Moldova's pro-Western government led by the Party of Action and Solidarity, or PAS, has been in power since 2021. Moldova watchers have warned the upcoming parliamentary vote is in Moscow's crosshairs. The summit's agenda states EU leaders will reiterate their 'unwavering commitment' to Moldova's sovereignty and security in the face of 'Russia's continued hybrid attacks.' Moscow has denied meddling in Moldova. Radu Magdin, a political analyst at Smartlink Communications, said the joint summit is 'of top symbolic importance' and could bolster support for PAS in the upcoming elections. 'The elections are pivotal, as a PAS government majority or a PAS-led coalition can be more credible for Brussels in terms of genuine intention of reform,' he said. 'The main threats to Moldova's accession process is any EU state opposition to Ukraine's entry.' Moldova's membership in the EU is conditional on the country enacting reforms in policy areas, known as chapters, in areas such as the rule of law, fundamental rights and economic reforms, a process that will likely take years. To support such reforms, Brussels is providing Moldova with up to 1.9 billion euros (about $2.2 billion) between 2025 and 2027. 'EU accession is not just a destination,' said Voda, the government spokesperson. 'It's a profound change for the benefit of the people.' President Sandu was reelected in a heated election last year that saw her beat a Russia-friendly opponent in an election cycle beleaguered by claims of Russian interference and voter fraud. Moldovans last year also voted narrowly in favor of securing the country's EU path. ___ McGrath reported from Sighisoara, Romania.

Elon Musk's Plan for New Party Scores Polling Win
Elon Musk's Plan for New Party Scores Polling Win

Newsweek

time31 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Elon Musk's Plan for New Party Scores Polling Win

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Elon Musk's surprise push to create a new political party is already shaking up the 2026 landscape, with fresh polling showing early momentum behind his outsider bid. A new survey conducted by Quantus Insights between June 30-July 2 among 1,000 registered voters found that 40 percent of voters—including many Republican voters—say they would consider backing the Tesla and SpaceX CEO's party over traditional GOP or Democratic candidates. The poll has a margin of error of plus or minus 3 percent. Elon Musk attends news conference with President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House, Friday, May 30, 2025, in Washington. Elon Musk attends news conference with President Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House, Friday, May 30, 2025, in Washington. Evan Vucci/AP Why It Matters Musk, who left the Trump administration in May, touted forming a new political party, which he called the "America Party," after revealing he was fiercely opposed to President Donald Trump's One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which narrowly passed the House on Thursday. "If this insane spending bill passes, the America Party will be formed the next day," he wrote in a string of posts on Monday. "Our country needs an alternative to the Democrat-Republican uniparty so that the people actually have a VOICE." The poll suggests Musk's new party could split conservative coalitions and draw in independents. What To Know According to the survey, 14 percent of voters said they would be "very likely" to support or vote for Musk's proposed party if it were launched, while 26 percent said they would be "somewhat likely." Another 38 percent said they were not likely to support it, while 22 percent remained unsure. The survey also revealed clear divides across party lines and demographics. Among men who identify as Republicans, interest was especially strong: 23 percent said they are "very likely" and 34 percent say "somewhat likely" to back the America Party—a total of 57 percent expressing openness to Musk's political brand. Male independents were also a promising base, with nearly half (47 percent) saying they're likely to support it. In contrast, Democrats appeared far more skeptical. Just 7 percent of male Democrats said they would be "very likely" to support Musk's party, while 36 percent said they would not likely back it at all. Among female Democrats, only 5 percent are "very likely" supporters. The poll also revealed dissatisfaction with both main parties. When asked which party best reflects American values, nearly a third of voters said "neither." Among independents, that share was even higher, with 59 percent saying neither the Republican nor Democratic Party represents values of America. By comparison, 37 percent of voters said the Republican Party best reflects American values, while 31 percent chose the Democratic Party. In a blog post, Quantus pollster Jason Corley wrote that the results indicate an "erosion" of "institutional loyalty, of cultural cohesion, and of trust." He added: "The signal is clear: a large slice of the electorate is open to something new, something disruptive. This is not about Musk. It's about the growing sense that the existing order is failing to represent the country as it truly is, or wants to be." Musk's net favorability rating currently stands at -18 points, according to pollster Nate Silver's tracker. Musk, who left the Trump administration in May after leading the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) for four months, has said that around 80 percent of Americans lie outside the ideological extremes represented by Democrats and Republicans—a potentially appealing talking point for an alternative political movement. But experts that Newsweek has spoken to have expressed doubt that the party would be able to make an impact. What People Are Saying Quantus Insights said on X: "The poll's intent was to simply capture the idea of another option, specifically one backed my Musk. 40 percent support isn't surprising. There are many out there who are absolutely shocked by the level of support when, in fact, it shouldn't be much of a shock at all. This kind of question always polls well. In 2023, 63 percent of Americans supported a third party, the highest in Gallup's 20-year trend." Dafydd Townley, an American politics expert at the University of Portsmouth, previously told Newsweek that "third parties do not tend to have a long lifetime in American politics," adding that Musk's new party "would likely split the Republican vote, potentially resulting in a Democrat-dominated House of Representatives, at least in the short term, due to the winner-takes-all electoral system." Mark Shanahan, a political scientist at the University of Surrey, who focuses on the U.S., echoed that skepticism, telling Newsweek: "I wouldn't hold out too much hope for an 'America Party' for a number of reasons. First, history is against it. The USA is a strongly two-party political system," he noted, pointing out that "around 90 percent [of Americans] actively identify with either the Republicans or Democrats," even if formal party membership is relatively low. What Happens Next The One Big Beautiful Bill Act now heads to Trump's desk, where he is expected to sign it on Friday.

Democrats hope Republicans just sealed their midterm election fates by voting for Trump's 'beautiful' bill
Democrats hope Republicans just sealed their midterm election fates by voting for Trump's 'beautiful' bill

Boston Globe

time33 minutes ago

  • Boston Globe

Democrats hope Republicans just sealed their midterm election fates by voting for Trump's 'beautiful' bill

'We heard from Mark from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania,' Jeffries said. 'Mark says, 'I've collected Medicaid and [Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program] benefits for over a decade now… SNAP and Social Security benefits have been life-saving for me; they literally keep me alive.' Advertisement 'Mark lives in Pennsylvania's First Congressional District,' continued Jeffries. 'I believe that district is represented by our colleague, Congressman Brian Fitzpatrick.' Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up And on and on Jeffries went, until he mentioned virtually every GOP member whom Democrats hope to defeat — an uncommon display of political name-checking by the staid standards of the House chamber. If it were not clear when Jeffries started talking, it was painfully obvious by the time he wrapped up: Democrats are treating President Trump's 'Big, Beautiful Bill' as the foundation of their case to take back majorities in Congress next year. 'This bill is an attack on Americans' financial freedom and Democrats are going to make it a centerpiece of the midterms,' said Representative Jake Auchincloss of Newton, before taking a position behind Jeffries Thursday morning as his speech extended into a sixth hour. Advertisement Some believe the vote could be as catastrophic for Republicans as their move in Trump's first term to repeal the Affordable Care Act, which helped fuel a Democratic wave in the 2018 midterm elections. According to Congress' nonpartisan budget analyst, the GOP bill could result in Representative Don Beyer, a Virginia Democrat, said Jeffries likely made his stand in order to mark the vote as the most decisive of this era, much like the failed vote in 2017 to repeal portions of the Affordable Care Act or even the 2010 vote that created it. 'I'm trying to think if there's been a more consequential vote in my 10 years?' Beyer said. 'I don't think so.' Republicans largely rejected those comparisons, arguing the legislation accomplished what goals voters sent them to Washington to do: cut taxes and drastically increase money spent on immigration enforcement. Representative Tim Burchett of Tennessee said the bill would 'absolutely not' harm the GOP's midterm hopes. Referring to its proposed tightening of work requirements for public benefits, he said, 'everybody in America wants somebody able-bodied to get off their butts and get a job if they're able to and get off of welfare, and this provides that incentive.' But there were flashes of candor from GOP lawmakers that they understood the potential political peril presented by the bill — even if they voted for it. Advertisement The majority is 'always at risk in a midterm year,' said GOP Representative Don Bacon, who represents a Nebraska swing district but recently announced his retirement. While the tax cut provisions will be helpful, he admitted 'the other side's going to use Medicaid as an issue' and said the Senate version of the legislation, which makes deeper cuts to the federal program to insure low-income Americans, would make their attacks easier. 'So I think that was a mistake,' he said. (Bacon voted for the legislation.) The bill Already, the electoral environment for House Republicans heading into 2026 leaves little room for error: Democrats need to flip just three seats in the chamber to claim a majority, and the party is targeting three-dozen incumbent Republicans to reach that threshold. The House GOP, meanwhile, In the Senate, Democrats' hopes are dimmer due to the rotation of seats up for election and the GOP's larger 53 to 47 majority. Just two seats held by Republicans are considered competitive: Maine and North Carolina. Democrats will be defending seats in the tough battlegrounds of Georgia, Michigan, and New Hampshire. North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis, who was highly critical of the bill and under considerable heat from Trump, announced he would retire just before voting against the legislation. Advertisement It was a different story in the House. All The midterms may seem far off, but the election politicking around the bill began well before Jeffries stepped onto the floor for his marathon speech. As House Democrats prepared Wednesday for the final votes, dozens gathered on the Capitol steps to decry the legislation and lay the blame on vulnerable Republicans. 'Why would anyone vote for this dangerous and extreme bill?' Jeffries asked, before name-checking a freshman Republican. 'Why would Rob Bresnahan vote for this bill? More than 30,000 people would lose access to their health care in his community in Pennsylvania.' Democrats were trying to pressure those Republicans to vote against the bill, but also were laying down markers for their 2026 target list. In addition to Bresnahan, who represents a swing district in northeast Pennsylvania, Jeffries spoke of Representative Scott Perry from a nearby district. The next speaker, Representative Katherine Clark of Revere, called out two California Republicans: David Valadao and Young Kim. Finally Democratic Representative Pete Aguilar of California singled out another endangered Republican from a blue state, Gabe Evans of Colorado. Advertisement 'Today marks the culmination of Donald Trump's betrayal of working people across this country,' Aguilar said, with words that sounded straight from an attack ad. In the long lead-up to Thursday's vote, Democrats' outside political committees began laying the groundwork for the midterm battles ahead. House Majority Forward, the super PAC aligned with Jeffries, was developing TV ads before the vote took place, focusing particularly on Bresnahan and Representatives Tom Barrett of Michigan and Derrick Van Orden of Wisconsin. House Majority Forward spokesperson, CJ Warnke, said House Republicans were 'throwing away their spines and throwing their constituents under the bus' with their votes. Republicans, meanwhile, plan to go on offense against vulnerable Democrats who voted against the bill. In a statement, National Republican Congressional Committee spokeswoman Maureen O'Toole accused Representative Jared Golden, who represents a Republican-leaning Maine district, of voting to 'raise taxes, kill jobs, and gut national security. Voters won't forget it, not now, not next November.' (Golden has been outspoken about his opposition to the bill, saying it provides 'huge tax breaks' for the wealthy, 'paid for by cutting health care for the working poor.') An NRCC campaign memo shared with the Globe previewed its campaign messaging around the bill, arguing it prevented a massive tax hike and delivered on promises to secure the border. It also framed the changes to Medicaid as moves to 'crack down on welfare fraud and restore integrity.' Many Republicans emphasized the extension of Trump's first-term tax cuts, which account for trillions of dollars of the cost of the legislation, or smaller-scale new tax breaks, such as one to let taxpayers deduct a limited amount of tipped wages from their taxable income. Advertisement 'The economy is going to do well, and people are going to be happy,' said Representative Jeff Van Drew, a New Jersey Republican. 'They really are.' As Jeffries closed his speech before the ultimately successful vote, however, a new slogan emerged to add a layer of ominousness to GOP plans. 'After Project 2025,' the Democratic leader said, referring to the conservative-backed plan to scale back government under Trump, 'comes Project 2026.' Tal Kopan of Globe staff contributed to this report. Sam Brodey can be reached at

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store