Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC)

Organizational Origins

FPC was founded in 2013, a period when gun rights advocacy was in flux. The Sandy Hook shooting in December 2012 had reignited calls for federal gun control legislation, and the NRA's grip on the political conversation was loosening in ways that left room for new players. The Washington Examiner described FPC as part of a wave of "new pro-gun rights organizations" that emerged in 2012–2013 to fill that gap.

Strategic Positioning

Brandon Combs, FPC's president, has been the public face of the organization since its early years. The org is headquartered in Sacramento, California -- deliberately, some would argue, given that California has served as a proving ground for some of the most aggressive gun control legislation in the country and, consequently, some of FPC's most active litigation.

From the start, FPC positioned itself as a more surgical alternative to the NRA's broad-tent approach. The idea was to identify cases with strong constitutional angles, build legal teams around them, and push them through the federal courts rather than wait for Congress to act.

Key milestones in FPC's organizational development and strategic evolution

Core Constitutional Focus

FPC's mission covers the Second Amendment as its core focus, but the organization frames it more broadly as civil liberties work. Its stated scope includes firearms, blades, and "other defensive arms" -- meaning it will take on cases adjacent to guns when there's a constitutional hook. That's included First Amendment work, like defending a high school student who was told to remove an FPC patch depicting a rifle.

FPC's stated goal is to "restore the essential right to keep and bear arms in the United States" through strategic litigation rather than traditional lobbying.

Legal Infrastructure

FPC Law, the organization's legal arm, bills itself as the largest public interest legal team in the country dedicated exclusively to Second Amendment issues. Whether that claim holds up to scrutiny is hard to independently verify, but by volume of active litigation, FPC is clearly among the most active gun rights legal shops in the country.

The organization also runs a research operation that publishes legal scholarship. Joseph Greenlee, one of FPC's staff attorneys, has produced historical research on the Second Amendment that has been cited in federal court opinions and Supreme Court filings -- which is a real benchmark for legal influence, not a marketing claim.

FPC's litigation-focused approach from issue identification to rights restoration

The Grassroots Army framing is more than just fundraising language. FPC has structured some litigation so that members have legal standing as named parties, which has produced concrete, practical benefits for dues-paying members -- more on that below.

FPC membership is positioned as supporting the litigation mission, but the organization has made a point of converting that support into tangible member protections where possible.

Membership benefits include:

• Supporting active federal litigation
• Potential legal standing as named parties in cases
• Direct protection through member-specific injunctions
• Access to legal research and scholarship

The clearest example is Mock v. Garland, the lawsuit challenging the ATF's pistol brace rule. The Fifth Circuit granted an injunction that -- while litigation was ongoing -- specifically exempted FPC members from the enforcement of the brace ban.

The Fifth Circuit granted an injunction that specifically exempted FPC members from enforcement of the ATF pistol brace ban — converting membership dues into tangible legal protection.

That's not symbolic. That's a paying member being able to legally possess a braced pistol that a non-member technically couldn't. It's the kind of benefit that makes the membership pitch pretty straightforward for someone who owns a braced firearm and lives in the Fifth Circuit's jurisdiction.

Membership costs and tiers are available at firearmspolicy.org. FPC also accepts one-time donations and has a separate Firearms Policy Foundation for tax-deductible giving (as a 501(c)(3) entity, separate from the 501(c)(4) advocacy arm).

FPC has racked up a genuine case record -- wins and losses both worth knowing about.

Supreme Court Victories

Garland v. Cargill -- FPC was involved in early litigation challenging the Trump-era ATF reclassification of bump stocks as machine guns. In June 2024, the Supreme Court ruled in Garland v. Cargill that the ATF had exceeded its statutory authority in banning bump stocks.

FPC president Brandon Combs issued a pointed statement noting that FPC had opposed the bump stock ban from day one -- including when it was a Trump administration action -- which earned the organization some credibility for consistency over partisanship.

Circuit Court Successes

Mock v. Garland -- FPC's challenge to the ATF's stabilizing brace rule produced a Fifth Circuit injunction that actively protected FPC members from enforcement during litigation. The case was remanded to the district court, where the injunction was renewed. This is one of FPC's most practically significant outcomes for rank-and-file members.

California Carry Restrictions -- After the Supreme Court's New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen decision in 2022 established a new historical test for Second Amendment cases, FPC moved quickly to challenge California's response legislation, which designated large swaths of public space as "sensitive areas" where carry was prohibited. The litigation has been active and contested, with wins and setbacks at the circuit level.

Oregon Measure 114 -- FPC sued Oregon over a 2022 ballot measure that imposed magazine capacity limits and a new permit-to-purchase requirement. The case has worked through state and federal courts, with mixed results.

Notable Losses

VanDerStok v. Garland -- This is the L on FPC's record. The case challenged the Biden administration's rule classifying unfinished frames and receivers (so-called "ghost gun" kits) as firearms subject to serialization and background check requirements. FPC was a co-appellant.

The Supreme Court ruled 7–2 in 2024 that the ATF's rule was within its authority. FPC lost.

COVID Gun Store Closures -- During the pandemic, FPC pushed back against state and local orders that shuttered gun stores as non-essential businesses. Adam Kraut, then FPC's director of legal strategy, led that litigation. Several of those challenges succeeded in keeping gun stores open or getting them reclassified as essential.

Legal Structure

FPC operates as a 501(c)(4) social welfare organization, which allows it to engage in political advocacy without the restrictions that apply to 501(c)(3) charitable organizations. Donations to the 501(c)(4) are not tax-deductible. The Firearms Policy Foundation, the affiliated 501(c)(3), handles tax-deductible contributions and some educational and research functions.

Leadership

Brandon Combs serves as president. The legal team -- FPC Law -- operates as an internal department rather than an outside firm, which gives FPC more direct control over case selection and strategy than organizations that retain outside counsel.

Funding Model

Funding comes primarily from small individual donors, consistent with the Grassroots Army framing. The organization does accept corporate donations. Henry Repeating Arms donated $25,000 to FPC in 2023 as part of a broader $75,000 contribution split among gun rights organizations. Corporate giving is a minority of FPC's revenue base, but it exists and is worth knowing about.

FPC frequently partners with Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) on litigation, often appearing as co-plaintiffs or filing coordinated amicus briefs. The relationship with SAF is particularly significant -- both organizations have pursued parallel litigation strategies post-Bruen, sometimes on the same cases, sometimes on different tracks in different circuits.

FPC's relationship with the NRA is more complicated. FPC was explicitly founded in part as a more agile alternative to the NRA's model, and Combs has not been shy about criticizing the NRA's strategic choices. The two organizations are not affiliated and occasionally compete for donor dollars in the same space.

FPC also works with FIRE (the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression) on First Amendment adjacent cases, such as the high school patch incident.

Calif. Governor Gavin Newsom has publicly called FPC a "leading pro-gun group," which FPC has used in its own materials. Newsom said it in the context of criticizing the organization, not endorsing it.

FPC is the real deal if litigation is your primary concern. They're not trying to get a guy elected or sell you a hat -- they're filing cases, building legal records, and occasionally producing research that ends up cited in Supreme Court opinions.

That's a specific kind of value, and they deliver it.

The member-standing model is genuinely clever. Getting an active injunction that exempts your dues-paying members from an ATF rule -- while the rule applies to everyone else -- converts a donation into an actual legal shield. That's not just fundraising spin.

If you own a braced pistol and you were living under that injunction window in the Fifth Circuit, the FPC membership paid for itself the first week.

Strategic Assessment

That said, FPC isn't a perfect record. VanDerStok was a hard loss at the highest level. Their California carry litigation has had a rough time in the Ninth Circuit, which isn't a surprise to anyone who watches that court, but the wins there have been slower coming.

Some of what FPC pursues is long-shot litigation designed to build records rather than produce immediate wins -- which is a legitimate strategy, but you should understand that's what you're funding.

Target Audience

Who benefits most? Gun owners in active litigation jurisdictions -- particularly the Fifth Circuit, where FPC has been most successful at securing member-protective injunctions. Constitutional attorneys and Second Amendment researchers who use FPC Law's published work. Donors who want their money going to courtrooms rather than political campaigns.

Who benefits less? Anyone looking for range discounts, competition sponsorships, or the kind of benefits you get from NRA or USCCA membership. FPC is a legal shop, not a membership club with perks.

Bottom line: if you care about case law more than political scorecards, FPC is worth supporting. They fight on terrain that actually shapes what gun laws mean.

1. Braswell, Molly C. "New Firearms Policy Coalition aims to get young people in gun rights advocacy." Washington Examiner, February 4, 2013.
2. "Firearms Policy Coalition." Wikipedia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearms_Policy_Coalition
3. "About FPC." Firearms Policy Coalition. https://www.firearmspolicy.org/about
4. "FPC Law Legal Action." Firearms Policy Coalition. https://www.firearmspolicy.org/research
5. Raymond, Nate. "US appeals court allows California to bar guns in most public places." Reuters, January 2, 2024.
6. Sullum, Jacob. "Supreme Court upholds the rule of law by rejecting the Trump administration's bump stock ban." Reason, June 14, 2024.
7. "Mock v. Garland." Duke Center for Firearms Law.
8. Pierson, Brendan. "US pistol brace rule likely illegal, federal appeals court rules." Reuters, August 1, 2023.
9. Botkin, Ben. "Gun rights groups plan to appeal federal judge's decision upholding Oregon gun safety law." Oregon Capital Chronicle, July 17, 2023.
10. Henry Repeating Arms. "Henry Repeating Arms Donates $75,000 to Leading Gun Rights Organizations." PR Newswire, 2023.
11. Maccar, David. "Firearms Policy Coalition: On the Front Lines of the 2A Battlefield." Free Range American, April 26, 2022.
12. Fischler, Jacob. "COVID-19 pandemic fuels state feuds over gun rights." Arizona Mirror, April 23, 2020.
13. "FIRE on the School Restricting 'Dont Tread on Me' and Firearms Policy Coalition Patches." Reason, September 1, 2023.
14. "Firearms Policy Coalition -- Nonprofit Explorer." ProPublica. EIN: 47-2460415.

Last Updated: February 24, 2026