Courts Rule Against Glock, Machine Gun “Switch” Lawsuits Proceed as States Win Major Legal Victories
Multiple courts have denied Glock’s motions to dismiss lawsuits alleging the manufacturer knowingly sells pistols easily converted into illegal machine guns with “Glock switches.” Chicago, Minnesota, and New Jersey have secured major legal victories in September and October 2025, allowing their cases to proceed to discovery. Courts rejected Glock’s arguments that the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) shields them from liability, holding that states sufficiently allege criminal conversions were foreseeable and known to Glock.
Glock announced it will redesign its pistol lineup with a new “V Series” intended to prevent switch conversions, marking the first significant design change in decades. The legal pressure mounts as at least six states and cities pursue litigation against the Austrian gunmaker.
What Are the Current Glock Lawsuits?
Chicago filed the first lawsuit in March 2024, alleging Glock manufactures pistols that can be converted to machine guns in minutes with a cheap device called a “Glock switch” or auto sear. The city expanded its lawsuit in July 2024 to include Glock’s Austrian parent company and two Chicago-area gun retailers.
Active Litigation Against Glock:
- Chicago (Cook County Circuit Court): Filed July 2024, the court denied Glock’s motion to dismiss in September 2025, allowing all claims to proceed. Chicago police recovered over 1,300 modified Glocks from 2021 through May 2024—averaging one per day.
- Minnesota (Hennepin County District Court): Filed December 2024, Judge Christian Sande denied Glock’s motion to dismiss in full in August 2025. The court ruled claims are not barred by PLCAA and “the Second Amendment does not prevent this action”.
- New Jersey (Superior Court): Filed December 2024, Superior Court Judge Lisa M. Adubato rejected Glock’s motion to dismiss in October 2025, finding the state set forth factual claims that Glock deliberately designed handguns to be readily convertible to illegal machine guns.
- Maryland & Baltimore (Baltimore City Circuit Court): Filed February 2025, the lawsuit seeks to stop sales until Glock changes its design. Baltimore police recovered over 100 modified Glocks in 2023-2024, with numbers nearly doubling from 2023 to 2024.
California Governor Gavin Newsom signed a first-of-its-kind ban on future Glock sales over switch allegations. Seattle also filed suit, creating a nationwide legal campaign against the manufacturer.
What Legal Claims Are Being Filed Against Glock?
States and cities allege multiple violations beyond simple product liability:
Primary Legal Theories:
Minnesota’s complaint alleges violations of state laws against consumer fraud, deceptive trade practices, false advertising, negligence, and nuisance. The lawsuit claims Glock has known since at least 1988 that its handguns can be easily converted to machine guns but glorifies and promotes fully automatic fire as “fun”.
Maryland’s lawsuit uses the state’s 2024 Gun Industry Accountability Act, which allows prosecutors to sue firearm manufacturers as a public nuisance for knowingly maintaining or contributing to public harm through firearms sales.
Chicago invokes the Illinois Firearms Industry Responsibility Act, seeking injunctive relief to stop sales, civil penalties, and damages. The lawsuit alleges Glock deceptively marketed pistols as safe while staying silent about conversion devices.
Key Allegations:
- Glock deliberately designed pistols to accept switches
- The company knew about conversion devices since the 1980s
- Glock promotes automatic fire on social media
- The manufacturer refuses to implement design changes
- Switches bearing Glock logos flood the market
Recent Court Rulings and Legal Implications
Courts have systematically rejected Glock’s defense arguments, creating precedent for firearm manufacturer liability.
Chicago Victory (September 2025)
Cook County Circuit Court denied Glock’s motion to dismiss entirely, marking a major legal victory for Chicago and affirming the city’s right to pursue accountability under the Illinois Firearms Industry Responsibility Act.
Minnesota Ruling (August 2025)
Hennepin County Judge Christian Sande held the State’s claims are not barred by PLCAA. The court rejected arguments that claims are not legally cognizable and found “the State sufficiently alleges that the act of criminals illegally converting Glock handguns into machine guns with Glock switches was foreseeable and known to Defendants”.
The ruling explicitly stated Second Amendment protections do not prevent this action.
New Jersey Decision (October 2025)
Judge Lisa M. Adubato rejected every one of Glock’s arguments. She found that if proven, the facts “go beyond general awareness of misuse and approach the conscious and culpable participation in another’s wrongdoing” required by law. The court ruled the statute regulates commercial actors’ conduct, not citizens’ rights to possess firearms.
Legal Significance:
These rulings establish that PLCAA does not provide absolute immunity when manufacturers knowingly create easily convertible weapons. Courts are applying state consumer protection laws and public nuisance statutes as exceptions to federal firearm immunity.
How Glock Switches Work and Why They’re Illegal
Glock switches prevent a firearm’s trigger bar from reengaging after a single shot, allowing continuous fire with a single trigger pull. In seconds, an amateur can use a switch no bigger than a LEGO—costing as little as $10—to transform a semiautomatic handgun into an illegal fully automatic weapon capable of firing up to 1,200 rounds per minute.
Between 2017 and 2021, the ATF reported a 570% increase in recovered Glock switches compared to the previous five years. Minneapolis Police Department recovered three times as many switches in 2023 as in 2021.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives classifies switches as machine guns under federal law. Possession has been illegal since the 1930s in many states.
What Is the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA)?
The Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, passed in 2005, protects firearms manufacturers and dealers from being held liable when crimes have been committed with their products. However, manufacturers can still be held liable for defective products, breach of contract, criminal misconduct, and negligent entrustment.
PLCAA Exceptions Allow These Lawsuits:
The law explicitly allows lawsuits against gun industry members who knowingly violate a state or federal law regulating the marketing or sale of firearms. States can enact laws creating standards of conduct and allow lawsuits when those standards are violated.
Courts have determined states’ consumer protection laws and public nuisance statutes qualify as exceptions, allowing Glock litigation to proceed despite federal immunity protections.
Glock’s Response: New “V Series” Pistols
Under mounting legal pressure, Glock confirmed it is preparing to release a new “V Series” of pistols to replace most current models. The company stated the changes are “necessary updates to align with upcoming offerings” while maintaining quality and reliability.
What This Means:
The redesign represents Glock’s first major model change since the 1980s. Generation 5 Glocks are already designed to be more challenging to outfit with illegal machine gun conversion devices. The V Series will likely incorporate similar resistance features across all models.
Industry observers note the change risks customer backlash if perceived as capitulating to gun-control activists. Gun-rights activists and customers nearly drove Smith & Wesson into bankruptcy after it agreed to change gun designs in a settlement with President Bill Clinton in 2000.
State-by-State Litigation Trends
Multiple states have enacted laws specifically enabling Glock lawsuits:
Illinois Firearms Industry Responsibility Act: Allows cities to sue manufacturers for unreasonable conduct endangering public health and safety.
Minnesota Consumer Protection Laws: Prohibit fraud, deceptive trade practices, and false advertising applicable to firearm sales.
New Jersey Public Safety Law (2022): Creates firearm industry public safety standards and civil enforcement mechanisms.
Maryland Gun Industry Accountability Act (2024): First case filed under this law, which allows prosecutors to sue firearm manufacturers as a public nuisance for knowingly contributing to public harm.
California AB 1127: Bans the sale or transfer of handguns with “cruciform trigger bars” found in Glock pistols.
A 16-state coalition of attorneys general formed to “reduce gun violence through coordinated enforcement of states’ respective civil liability and consumer protection laws”. Member states include California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington D.C.
What Do These Lawsuits Mean for Glock Owners?
For Current Glock Owners:
Owning a Glock pistol remains legal. Lawsuits target the manufacturer’s conduct, not individual ownership rights. Possession of switches themselves is already illegal under federal law. ATF seized more than 4,500 switches in 2023.
Potential Impacts:
- Resale Values: Older models may see value changes as V Series replaces discontinued models
- Future Purchases: New designs may have different features affecting aftermarket compatibility
- Legal Liability: Owners installing switches face federal machine gun charges with mandatory minimum sentences
For Prospective Buyers:
Most Generation 3 and 4 models are listed as “discontinued” on Glock’s website, along with some Generation 5 models. The V Series expected in stores represents Glock’s compliance response to litigation pressure.
Liability Issues and Manufacturer Defenses
Glock’s primary defenses have failed in multiple jurisdictions:
Rejected Arguments:
- PLCAA Immunity: Courts found state laws create valid exceptions
- Second Amendment Protections: Rulings hold commercial regulation doesn’t infringe individual rights
- Third-Party Criminal Conduct: Courts determined conversions were foreseeable to Glock
- Commerce Clause Violations: Judges rejected claims state laws unconstitutionally regulate interstate commerce
Comparative Analysis:
The National Shooting Sports Foundation defended Glock, calling the lawsuits “coordinated lawfare” by Democratic attorneys general. However, the trade association did not mention victims of shootings involving Glock switches or steps the manufacturer could take.
Unlike successful defenses in cases where criminal misuse was unforeseeable, courts find Glock’s decades of knowledge about easy conversion undermines traditional immunity protections.
FAQs About Glock Lawsuits
Q: Has Glock settled any of these lawsuits?
A: No settlements have been announced. All cases remain in active litigation, now proceeding to discovery after courts denied dismissal motions.
Q: How much are states seeking in damages?
A: Lawsuits seek injunctive relief to stop sales, civil penalties, restitution for public harm, and damages. Specific dollar amounts have not been publicly disclosed.
Q: Will these lawsuits ban Glock ownership?
A: No. Lawsuits target manufacturing and sales practices, not individual ownership. Courts explicitly distinguished between regulating commercial actors and restricting citizens’ Second Amendment rights.
Q: What happens in discovery?
A: With motions to dismiss denied, states can now seek internal Glock documents, communications about switch awareness, design decisions, and marketing materials from 1987 forward.
Q: Can other gun manufacturers be sued similarly?
A: Yes. Critics note Glock guns are among the easiest to convert, but other manufacturers whose firearms accept similar devices could face comparable litigation under state consumer protection laws.
Q: What about the federal government’s role?
A: House Oversight Committee is investigating possible collusion between Everytown and the White House after Glock declined design changes following a meeting with the White House Office of Gun Violence Prevention.
Q: How long until trial?
A: Discovery typically takes 12-18 months. Trials could begin in late 2026 or 2027 unless Glock settles before then.
Conclusion: Landmark Cases Reshape Firearm Liability
The wave of Glock lawsuits represents the most significant challenge to firearm manufacturer immunity since PLCAA’s passage. With courts ruling that knowingly creating easily convertible weapons exceeds federal immunity protections, manufacturers face new accountability under state consumer protection laws.
Glock’s decision to redesign its entire product line demonstrates the lawsuits’ practical impact. Whether courts ultimately hold the company liable remains undetermined, but the legal precedent established—that PLCAA does not provide absolute immunity when manufacturers have knowledge of foreseeable harm—will influence firearm litigation for decades.
For those involved in Glock-related disputes or concerned about manufacturer accountability, these cases are actively evolving. The discovery phase will reveal internal company documents that may prove critical to final outcomes.
Disclaimer: This information is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult an attorney specializing in product liability or firearm law for specific legal guidance.
Related Articles:
- What Are Wage and Hour Violations
- Kansas City Product Liability Lawyer
- Charleston Product Liability Lawyers
About the Author
Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah