Federal Court Rules Federal Gun Law Is Unconstitutional

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently ruled against the federal ban on handgun sales to individuals under 21, citing a conflict with Second Amendment rights.

Key Takeaways

The federal appeals court deemed the handgun sales ban for under-21s unconstitutional.
The decision aligns with a 2022 Supreme Court ruling on historical gun rights.
The Biden administration supported the ban in the past, while gun rights groups pushed back on it.
Similar bans have been invalidated in other states, highlighting a trend.
The ruling has been sent to a lower court for additional actions.

Court Strikes Down Age-Based Gun Law

The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals concluded that preventing individuals aged 18 to 20 from purchasing handguns contradicts the Second Amendment. This decision comes after the 2022 Supreme Court case emphasizing historical contexts for gun laws. Judge Edith Jones stated that the Second Amendment includes young adults among those whose rights are protected. Federal law had constrained licensed dealers to sell handguns only to individuals 21 and older.

The challenge was launched in 2020 by young adults and gun rights organizations. Eventually, the long-standing federal prohibition was called into question, reshaping the narrative of Second Amendment rights for younger adults.

Federal court rules ban on handgun sales to adults under age 21 is unconstitutional https://t.co/3ACWvQxHBU pic.twitter.com/lm5dQYzQlQ

— New York Post (@nypost) January 30, 2025

Impact and Response

The ruling aligns with a broader judicial trend of dismantling age restrictions on firearm purchases. States like Minnesota, Virginia, and Texas have seen similar rulings. The Justice Department must now address this constitutional challenge while awaiting further actions from a lower court.

The Firearms Policy Coalition called this win a critical step in restoring the rights of all peaceful adults in the U.S. Alan Gottlieb, another gun rights advocate, remarked on the ruling by emphasizing the trust placed in young adults serving in the military and questioning the extra restrictions placed on their firearm ownership.

Some, however, were less thrilled about the decision. The Giffords Law Center, for instance, responded by suggesting the ruling was too careless and that the age restrictions aid in preventing violent incidents.

A Historical Legal Context

The court’s findings rest heavily on the New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen decision. The appeals court’s current perspective differs from its 2012 decision, reflecting evolving interpretations of the Second Amendment. While the Biden administration previously held firm against this shift, advocacy groups like the Firearms Policy Coalition continue to champion broader firearm rights.

The shift remains contentious as organizations opposing the ruling voice concerns about increased accessibility leading to violence. These opposing views will persist as the case returns to the lower courts, emphasizing the complexity of balancing public safety and constitutional freedoms.