Court Expansion Debate and Gun Rulings Shape Coverage as Supreme Court Prepares for AR-15 Case

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday that a federal law restricting interstate commerce in switchblade knives violates the Second Amendment, and a federal judge in the Western District of New York struck down New York's restrictions on personal body armor. Both courts found the items qualify as constitutionally protected arms. The rulings come as the Supreme Court prepares to hear oral arguments in Viramontes v. Cook County, which could decide whether AR-15-style rifles are protected arms. Dudley Brown, president of the National Association for Gun Rights, whose group filed an amicus brief, said a ruling against AR-15 bans could influence future challenges to limits on magazines, automatic knives, body armor and other defensive equipment. Separately, the court's size and direction drew new comment. Hillary Clinton said the court should have 13 justices, and Kagan warned that far-right rulings will undermine American democracy, saying Americans see the political system as a nightmare and are right to.

MS NOW, the left-leaning outlet, leads with Clinton's 13-justice position. It calls the idea a once-fringe Democratic view that has become mainstream and says the court has only itself to blame. Right-leaning coverage splits. Fox News focuses on the gun rulings, Viramontes and Brown's view that a Supreme Court decision could widen Second Amendment protections. RealClearPolitics carries Mike Davis of the Article III Project, who told Laura Ingraham that Democrats want to pack the court until they get the rulings they want. The two sides therefore address court expansion with opposite framing: the left presents it as a justified, now-mainstream response to the court's conduct, while the right presents it as a partisan effort to secure outcomes. Only the right's coverage details specific cases. Truthout adds a distinct angle through Kagan's warning, while Reason's item is only a historical note on an 1894 case.