It’s never made sense at all that someone who is legally able to buy a handgun in their own state, say, Louisiana, is prohibited from buying and taking possession of one in another state. Say, Texas. They can pay for a handgun in another state, but under federal law, the Texas dealer has to ship the gun to an FFL in Louisiana before the buyer can take possession.
A fifth Circuit case — Elite Precision v. ATF — argued that state lines shouldn’t matter, just as they don’t in sales of rifles and shotguns. You fill out the same paperwork and pass the same background check, no matter where you are. Last night, a Fifth Circuit three-judge panel reversed a lower court decision, ruling 2 to 1 that the federal interstate handgun sales ban violates the Second Amendment.
Plaintiffs unsuccessfully sought a permanent injunction against several provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 922 that collectively prohibit the buying and selling of handguns across state lines. The only issue is whether those provisions are constitutional under the Second Amendment. They are not: Under Bruen, they implicate the Second Amendment’s plain text, making them presumptively unconstitutional, and the government has failed to meet its burden to justify the provisions as consistent with the nation’s tradition of firearms regulation. We reverse and render judgment for plaintiffs.
Strangely, the court decided that having the right to keep and bear arms includes the right to buy them. Crazy, no?
Oh, and we need to get this paragraph needlepointed on a pillow:
Even to the extent that the Ban can be circumvented by the licensee-to-licensee transfer workaround (which vests full veto power over interstate handgun sales in a group of third parties financially dependent on the government’s licensing regime), the Ban invariably calls for the payment of a fee over and above the cost of a handgun. We must pause before endorsing a cost attached to the exercise of a fundamental constitutional right. To the extent that prior decisions from this court hint there is an acceptable cost that may be imposed on the basic exercise of Second Amendment rights, they are abrogated by Bruen and its progeny.
Oooh…so good.
We’ll need to see what the DOJ’s approach to this is. Will they appeal? Or, as with the Silencer Shop/Jensen ruling, will they let it stand? Also, this Fifth Circuit banger conflicts with a similar ruling from the Second Circuit, setting up another juicy circuit court split that will be ripe for SCOTUS scrutiny. Don’t touch that dial.
And from the Department of Justice...
Are you still blackpilling? Because since Trump installed new management at DOJ and ATF, we’ve seen an almost unbroken string of wins and sensible actions that positively effect the gun rights of every law-abiding American. The zero tolerance policy is dead. Harmeet Dhillon established a Second Amendment section of her Civil Rights division. The $200 NFA transfer tax has been zeroed out. Patrick Adamiak has been freed. And there’s lots more.
The latest move just came today as the Main Justice office of legal counsel has issued a memorandum opinion stating that federal law that prohibits handgun sales as applied to adults aged 18 to 20 years old is unconstitutional.
Section 922(b)(1) and (c)(1) of title 18, U.S. Code, is unconstitutional as applied to young adults between eighteen and twenty who seek to purchase handguns. The provision prevents young adults, who are members of “the people” to whom the Second Amendment applies, from owning “arms” in common use for self-defense. This places the burden on the government to show that the restrictions are consistent with the Nation’s tradition of firearm regulation, which it cannot do.
You can read the 49-page opinion here.
The Gun Control Act of 1968 banned sales of handguns (and hangun ammo) to adults under 21 years of age. The office of legal counsel’s opinion states that the law “may not be enforced to impose criminal penalties on dealers who sell handguns to a class of law-abiding adults who, in nearly every other relevant respect, are members of the political community.”
The opinion is based on the Supreme Court’s Bruen ruling (the gift that keeps on giving) and makes the eminently reasonable judgement that adults aged 18 to 20 are, in fact, part of “the People” in terms of the Second Amendment and handguns are arms protected by the same civil right.
The DOJ’s opinion here agrees with that of the Fifth Circuit ruling last year that declared the adult age restrictions unconstitutional.
While this is a win, the law remains on the books. Congress hasn’t acted (as if) and a DOJ opinion isn’t a Supreme Court ruling. And there’s nothing to stop individual states from outlawing sales to young adults. The courts have been divided on the subject and with the Fifth Circuit’s ruling in Reese on the books, this would seem ripe for SCOTUS review. At some point. Stay tuned.
– Dan Zimmerman, Shooting News Weekly
