How Trump’s gun policy changes could affect Connecticut gun laws
—
A customer looks at a pistol at a vendor’s display during a 2016 gun show in Miami.
Lynne Sladky / Associated Press
Since President Donald Trump took office last year, his administration has gradually rolled back regulations governing who can get guns.
The administration has, among other things, eliminated the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, ended a “zero tolerance” policy for gun dealers, eased restrictions on veterans with mental illness acquiring guns, moved to permit guns to be sent through the mail, and reinstated the rule that lets people at gun shows buy firearms without undergoing a background check.
Advertisement
Article continues below this ad
Meanwhile, the U.S. Supreme Court could soon deal a direct blow to Connecticut’s gun-control laws when it rules on whether the state’s ban on semiautomatic weapons is constitutional during the upcoming term.
Altogether, the changes at the federal level have Connecticut’s gun-control advocates concerned the state’s famously strict gun laws won’t be enough to keep firearms out of the state.
“All of these rollbacks combine to weaken the overall protection for Connecticut and the people who live here,” said Stacey Mayer, director of advocacy, policy and outreach for the advocacy group Connecticut Against Gun Violence. “It doesn’t matter how strong the state laws are, it’s hard to fight back against that.”
The Trump administration counters that the changes it has imposed are “common sense” measures meant to simplify existing regulations.
Advertisement
Article continues below this ad
“ATF’s recent rule changes are designed to create straightforward rules that will provide clarity and consistency for all,” Austin Wozniak, a spokesperson for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, said in a statement.
What is changing?
On his first day in office, Trump announced he would shutter the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention, which had been created under President Joe Biden.
Advertisement
Article continues below this ad
Since then, the administration has chipped away at gun regulations in various ways.
In April 2025, it made it harder to revoke a gun dealer’s license by reversing the “zero tolerance” policy, under which dealers who willfully violate federal law immediately lose their licenses.
In June 2025, it proposed steep staffing cuts at the ATF, and The Trace reported the following January that the agency had been “effectively starved” of resources and support, hindering its ability to investigate gun crimes.
In February, it ended a decades-old policy blocking veterans with serious mental health disorders from acquiring firearms.
In April, it moved to reopen the “gun show loophole,” closed under Biden, which allows people to purchase firearms without background checks at gun shows or over the internet.
Also in April, it proposed rescinding Biden-era restrictions on attachments that let gun users brace pistols against their bodies like rifles, essentially improving control and shooting accuracy.
In May, it proposed allowing people to ship guns through the mail for the first time in nearly a century.
Many of these policies have come under criticism in Connecticut, where the 2012 mass shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School helped inspire some of the nation’s strictest gun regulations.
Earl Bloodworth, executive director at Connecticut Against Gun Violence, describes the Trump administration’s changes as “just insane folly and very regressive.”
Advertisement
Article continues below this ad
“They want individuals who have been deemed to have mental health issues, particularly in the veteran demographic, to still be able to purchase firearms with no problems,” Bloodworth said. “That’s insane that folks who have a recorded history of mental illness and are not getting or seeking proper treatment, that we would allow them to possess firearms that could cause a danger to themselves and to others.”
Wozniak defended these changes in a statement.
Restrictions against mailing firearms are no longer necessary, he said, because purchasers can verify their identities remotely. The zero tolerance law, he said, was “both excessive and counterproductive,” undermining trust between regulators and gun dealers. The easing restrictions on mentally ill veterans owning guns “reflect modern understandings of mental health and capacity,” he said.
As the Trump administration has rewritten regulations, the Supreme Court has issued several rulings favorable to gun owners, including one that overturned a Hawaii law barring gun owners from bringing their weapons onto private property that is open to the public.
Advertisement
Article continues below this ad
At some point during its 2026-27 term, the Supreme Court is expected to rule on a suit challenging Connecticut’s ban on semiautomatic rifles, as well as a similar ban implemented in Cook County, Illinois.
How does it affect Connecticut?
Connecticut’s strict gun laws insulate the state from some federal changes. For instance, Connecticut requires background checks for all gun purchases, including those at gun shows or over the internet, and imposes additional restrictions on gun dealers.
Still, Mayer notes, Connecticut is not an island. Someone who purchases a gun without a background check in another state may bring it to Connecticut. Same for someone who purchases a gun from a dealer who lacks a permit to sell in Connecticut.
Advertisement
Article continues below this ad
“When you have federal pullback, it undermines state-level protections because there’s weakened oversight, and this naturally will increase the flow of firearms into states across borders,” Mayer said. “So what happens at the federal level and what happens in states with weaker gun laws impacts Connecticut.”
Mayer notes that states with stronger gun laws, including Connecticut, tend to have significantly lower rates of gun deaths than those with looser gun laws. According to Everytown for Gun Safety, Connecticut has the nation’s fifth-strictest gun laws and sixth-lowest rate of gun deaths. More guns coming into the state, she argues, could lead to more deaths.
If the Supreme Court rules against Connecticut’s ban on semiautomatic weapons, it could mark the end of one of Connecticut’s signature post-Sandy Hook gun policies and a major win for gun-rights groups in the state.
The Connecticut Citizens Defense League, a plaintiff in the case, says the legal challenge “is well suited to destroy the ‘Assault Weapon’ ban and restore our rights.”
Advertisement
Article continues below this ad
For gun-control advocates, it would be a painful loss, one they say could increase the chance of mass shootings and other tragedies in Connecticut.
“If it’s overturned, will we be less safe as residents of the state of Connecticut?” Bloodworth said. “Absolutely.”
What comes next?
The Supreme Court has scheduled oral arguments in the Connecticut case for Dec. 2, after which it will issue a decision before its term ends in June or July.
Advertisement
Article continues below this ad
Meanwhile, the Trump administration will move forward with certain proposals that remain pending, including the rule allowing guns to be sent through the mail, and could propose additional changes.
In Connecticut, lawmakers have sought to stay ahead of federal changes by tightening state gun laws however possible. Earlier this year, after the Trump administration eased regulation on forced-reset triggers, which let semiautomatic rifles fire more quickly, Gov. Ned Lamont signed a bill banning the sale of these devices.
Mayer said she hopes lawmakers will continue strengthening Connecticut’s gun laws in response to federal changes. If the Supreme Court overturns the ban on semiautomatic weapons, she says, state lawmakers would likely introduce some sort of new law along similar lines.
Advertisement
Article continues below this ad
“Should the law get overturned, we will go to the legislature and figure out how we can be sure to keep our community safe,” Mayer said. “Our post-Sandy Hook framework has made us one of the safest states in the country, and we really want to make sure that remains the case.”
