A major decision by the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has struck down the longstanding federal restriction preventing adults aged 18 to 20 from purchasing handguns from licensed dealers. The three-judge panel ruled unanimously that this prohibition violates the Second Amendment, delivering a substantial victory to gun rights advocates.
Federal Ban Declared Unconstitutional

Jake Fogleman of The Reload reported that Judge Edith Jones, writing for the court in Reese v. ATF, found that the restriction does not align with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. The ruling follows the precedent set by New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which changed the way courts evaluate modern gun laws. This decision directly challenges federal statutes that have, for decades, barred young adults from purchasing handguns through legal, regulated channels.
The Rationale Behind the Decision

The ruling centers on the argument that 18-to-20-year-olds are considered legal adults for most constitutional rights. As Copper Jacket TV host William pointed out, individuals in this age group can vote, sign contracts, and even serve in the military – where they are trained to handle firearms. Yet, federal law restricted them from purchasing the most common self-defense firearm: a handgun.
Judge Jones emphasized this inconsistency, stating that at the time of the nation’s founding, young adults were not barred from acquiring firearms. In fact, as Mark W. Smith of The Four Boxes Diner highlighted, the Militia Act of 1792 required 18-year-olds to enroll in the militia and personally procure their own firearms. This historical precedent directly contradicts the government’s argument that banning handgun sales to this age group has deep roots in American law.
The Bruen Standard and Its Impact

Victor Nava of the New York Post noted that the court’s decision followed the Bruen test, which demands that any modern firearm restriction must be justified by historical precedent. The Biden administration had argued that age-based restrictions existed in the 19th century, but the Fifth Circuit dismissed this reasoning. Judge Jones pointed out that laws passed long after the Second Amendment’s ratification hold little weight in determining its original intent.
Smith underscored this point by explaining how the Bruen framework shifts the burden onto the government to prove that a regulation aligns with the historical understanding of the Second Amendment. In this case, the government failed to provide sufficient evidence of similar laws existing at the time of the founding.
Gun Rights Groups Celebrate

The decision was met with applause from gun rights organizations. The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), both of which helped bring the case to court, issued statements praising the ruling. Adam Kraut, executive director of SAF, emphasized that the right to keep and bear arms includes the ability to purchase them, stating that 18-to-20-year-olds are just as much “the People” as their older counterparts.
FPC President Brandon Combs echoed this sentiment, calling the ruling “a critical win” against what he described as an “immoral and unconstitutional age-based gun ban.” Both organizations have been at the forefront of legal challenges against restrictive gun laws, and this ruling strengthens their argument that courts are beginning to take a more originalist approach to Second Amendment interpretation.
Critics Push Back

Not everyone welcomed the decision. Brady: United Against Gun Violence, a nonprofit advocating for stricter gun laws, condemned the ruling, arguing that it would increase firearm access among teenagers. The organization warned that rolling back such restrictions could lead to more gun-related incidents.
However, as William of Copper Jacket TV pointed out, this argument overlooks the fact that 18-to-20-year-olds have always been able to acquire rifles and shotguns. The only difference was the federal restriction on handguns, which the court found to be an arbitrary limitation without strong historical support.
The Supreme Court’s Next Move?

This ruling adds further pressure on the Supreme Court to clarify the scope of Second Amendment protections for young adults. Nava noted that just before the Fifth Circuit issued its decision, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments on a similar case. Additionally, Minnesota has petitioned the Supreme Court to review a lower court decision that struck down its age-based restrictions on concealed carry permits.
Smith predicted that this case – or a similar one – will eventually make its way to the Supreme Court. Given the Court’s recent tendency to strengthen gun rights, many believe the justices could affirm the Fifth Circuit’s reasoning, potentially eliminating similar age-based restrictions nationwide.
What Happens Next?

Despite the victory, the case is not entirely settled. The Fifth Circuit has remanded Reese v. ATF back to the district court, which must now issue a final ruling in line with the appeals court’s findings. The government still has the option to challenge the decision, either by requesting an en banc review from the full Fifth Circuit or by appealing to the Supreme Court.
Smith speculated that the Biden administration might hesitate to push the case further, knowing that a Supreme Court ruling could set an even broader precedent against gun control measures. If the administration chooses not to appeal, the ruling will stand, and 18-to-20-year-olds will regain their ability to purchase handguns from licensed dealers.
Why This Decision Matters

This ruling is significant for multiple reasons. First, it reinforces the legal principle that the Second Amendment applies equally to all adult citizens, not just those over 21. Second, it further cements Bruen as the dominant standard for evaluating gun laws, making it harder for the government to justify modern restrictions.
Fogleman pointed out that this decision follows a pattern of courts overturning firearm restrictions that disproportionately affect younger adults. If this trend continues, more laws targeting specific age groups could be struck down, reshaping gun laws across the country.
A Turning Point in 2A Litigation

The decision in Reese v. ATF is not just a simple victory for one group of plaintiffs – it signals a shift in how courts interpret the Second Amendment. William emphasized that this ruling shows that courts are no longer willing to accept vague historical justifications for modern restrictions.
If history is any indication, the fight over gun rights will continue, but this ruling represents a clear shift in favor of broader Second Amendment protections.
A Defining Moment for the Second Amendment

The Fifth Circuit’s ruling is a direct challenge to how age-based gun restrictions have been justified for decades. By striking down the handgun sales ban for 18-to-20-year-olds, the court is forcing lawmakers and regulators to grapple with a tough reality: if young adults are trusted with military service, voting rights, and legal independence, then the government can’t arbitrarily strip them of their right to armed self-defense.
This case also underscores a growing trend in Second Amendment litigation. Courts are becoming more skeptical of broad gun restrictions, especially those without a strong historical foundation.
The Fight Isn’t Over

What happens next depends largely on whether the Biden administration wants to take this fight to the Supreme Court. They could gamble on an appeal, but that could backfire spectacularly if the highest court in the land affirms the ruling and extends its impact nationwide. The fight isn’t over, but for millions of young adults who have long been denied their right to purchase handguns legally, this decision is a game-changer.
To dive deeper into this topic, check out The Reload’s article here, New York Post’s article here, and watch the full video on Copper Jacket TV here, and on The Four Boxes Diner here.

A former park ranger and wildlife conservationist, Lisa’s passion for survival started with her deep connection to nature. Raised on a small farm in northern Wisconsin, she learned how to grow her own food, raise livestock, and live off the land. Lisa writes about homesteading, natural remedies, and survival strategies. Whether it’s canning vegetables or setting up a rainwater harvesting system, Lisa’s goal is to help others live more sustainably and prepare for the unexpected.