A Republican bill with 10 Republican cosponsors · See all 10 cosponsors
Last activity — Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
This bill is titled the Freedom from Improper Regulation and Enforcement Act, or the FIRE Act. It aims to stop capacity-based restrictions on firearm magazines. Specifically, the bill prevents federal officers or employees from making or enforcing regulations that limit firearm magazines based on their capacity. It also states that any State or local law imposing a limitation, prohibition, or penalty on firearm magazines based on capacity will have no force or effect. Additionally, the bill defines what a firearm magazine and capacity mean under the law. These changes apply to conduct happening 30 or more days after the Act is enacted.
Yes
- Scored +8
Would gun owners be better off under this?
The bill directly benefits firearm owners by removing federal, state, and local capacity-based restrictions on magazines.
- Scored +8
Does this protect the right to own guns?
The bill protects gun owners by prohibiting federal, state, and local capacity-based restrictions on firearm magazines.
The opposite
- Scored -7
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
The bill preempts state and local laws regarding firearm magazine capacity limits, thereby reducing state and local legislative authority in this area.
- Scored -7
Does this put more limits on buying or owning guns?
The bill invalidates capacity-based restrictions on firearm magazines, which is viewed negatively by proponents of stricter gun control measures.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Protection Against Federal Regulations: Under Section 2(a), federal officers and employees are prohibited from prescribing or enforcing regulations that limit or prohibit firearm magazines based on their capacity. This could be seen as positive for individuals who want to ensure the federal government does not restrict the amount of ammunition their firearm magazines can hold.
-
Invalidation of State and Local Laws: According to Section 2(b), any State or local law that imposes limitations, prohibitions, or penalties on firearm magazines based on capacity will have no force or effect. This may benefit individuals by removing local and state restrictions on magazine capacity.
Potential Negative Impacts for People
- Removal of Local Safety Rules: Under Section 2(b), State and local laws that impose limitations, prohibitions, or penalties based on firearm magazine capacity are rendered without force or effect. This could be viewed negatively by people or groups who support local or state control over firearm regulations and capacity limits for public safety reasons.
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would gun owners be better off under this? — The bill directly benefits firearm owners by removing federal, state, and local capacity-based restrictions on magazines.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The bill preempts state and local laws regarding firearm magazine capacity limits, thereby reducing state and local legislative authority in this area.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this protect the right to own guns? — The bill protects gun owners by prohibiting federal, state, and local capacity-based restrictions on firearm magazines. Does this put more limits on buying or owning guns? — The bill invalidates capacity-based restrictions on firearm magazines, which is viewed negatively by proponents of stricter gun control measures.
- 12/18/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 10/17/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 9/16/2025
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 7/29/2025
- 3 Cosponsors added.
- 7/17/2025
- Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
- 4 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in House
One bill Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Michael BaumgartnerRepublican · Washington
Sheri BiggsRepublican · South Carolina
Mike CollinsRepublican · Georgia
Russ FulcherRepublican · Idaho
Brandon GillRepublican · Texas
Michael RulliRepublican · Ohio
Pete StauberRepublican · Minnesota
Thomas TiffanyRepublican · Wisconsin
Claudia TenneyRepublican · New York
David TaylorRepublican · Ohio