In a sweeping legal attack, Elite Precision Customs LLC and the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) have filed suit against the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), arguing that the federal ban on nonresident handgun purchases has no historical foundation and violates the Second Amendment. This case, Elite Precision v. ATF, is now unfolding in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
According to the plaintiffs’ legal brief filed on July 14, 2025, the law in question, specifically 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(3), bars citizens from buying handguns out of state, even if the buyer passes a background check and both parties follow federal law. The brief calls this restriction “a logistical and monetary tax” on the right to keep and bear arms.
Kirk Calls It a “Monumental Challenge”
William Kirk, president of Washington Gun Law, spotlighted the case in a recent video, describing it as a “monumental challenge” to a longstanding but largely unquestioned law. “Even if they know absolutely positively the firearm is being sent to the right person,” Kirk explained, “the FFL [federal firearms licensee] still has to send it to an in-state dealer,” adding delays, fees, and complications.
Kirk praised the legal arguments advanced by FPC, noting that the case doesn’t just rely on policy critiques but instead focuses on the constitutional question of whether this law is consistent with historical firearms regulation in the United States. His summary of the case emphasized that FPC is not asking for new rights – just restoration of existing ones.
The Law’s Effect on Americans Like Herron and Blish
In the court filings, the plaintiffs describe real-world harm to individuals like Tim Herron and Freddie Blish – both respected firearms instructors and competitive shooters. Herron, based in New Mexico, often travels for training events and has repeatedly been prevented from purchasing handguns he finds while on the road. Blish, from Arizona, faces the same problem.
Because of this federal restriction, they’re forced to ship firearms from out-of-state dealers to local dealers, incurring transfer fees and delays. According to the brief, this creates “an effective veto” by in-state dealers over a citizen’s ability to shop competitively across state lines.
Elite Precision’s Role in the Lawsuit
The named plaintiff, Elite Precision Customs, is a federally licensed dealer in Mansfield, Texas. Owner statements in the lawsuit make it clear they’d gladly sell handguns to out-of-state buyers – if not for the federal ban. Texas law doesn’t prohibit such sales, but the federal government does. Elite Precision stands to gain significant business if the rule is overturned, as customers like Herron and Blish would buy from them during training trips.
Their involvement in the lawsuit highlights how the law doesn’t just impact buyers. It also burdens small businesses that are arbitrarily limited in who they can serve.
The Bruen Standard and Historical Review
A major focus of the lawsuit is how the rule fails the Supreme Court’s Bruen test. In New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), the Court held that modern firearm regulations must be consistent with the “Nation’s historical tradition.” The plaintiffs argue that the ATF’s restriction on interstate handgun sales doesn’t even come close.
According to the brief, despite the government citing various laws from colonial America, not one of them restricts peaceable citizens from acquiring firearms in another jurisdiction in a way that matches this modern ban. William Kirk noted that the government is trying to argue this law imposes only a “minimal intrusion,” but that logic doesn’t fly anymore. “Even a small cost,” he said, “can trigger constitutional scrutiny.”
No Analogues, No Justification
Plaintiffs’ attorneys conducted a detailed review of early American laws and found no historical precedent for restricting out-of-state handgun purchases. The closest analogues the government could produce, according to the brief, were temporary wartime measures or regulations aimed at preventing sales to hostile groups – not blanket bans on peaceful Americans shopping across state lines.
The plaintiffs argued that even if some laws required gunpowder inspections or restricted trading with foreign groups like Native American tribes, none mirror the federal ban now in place. They insist the ATF’s rule is a modern invention that can’t be justified under the Constitution.
A Right to Buy, Not Just to Own
The lawsuit emphasizes a key point that often gets overlooked: the Second Amendment doesn’t just protect the right to possess firearms, but also the right to acquire them. The brief cites Fifth Circuit decisions, including Reese v. ATF, which recognized that the right to “keep and bear arms” logically includes the right to purchase them.
As William Kirk explained in his video, the government’s argument that this is just a small inconvenience is misleading. “It’s not a minor thing when you have to pay a $40 fee, deal with paperwork, and wait extra time – all for something that’s supposed to be a constitutional right,” he said.
Facial and As-Applied Challenges
Plaintiffs have launched both facial and as-applied challenges, meaning they believe the law is unconstitutional in all situations – or, at the very least, in how it’s applied to people like Herron and Blish. Kirk notes that even if the courts hesitate to throw out the law entirely, they could still rule that it’s unconstitutional when used against individuals who are fully compliant with all other federal and state laws.
If the court agrees that the rule lacks historical justification, even in limited cases, it could spell the beginning of the end for this federal restriction.
Where the Case Stands Now
Currently, both sides have filed their motions – FPC is asking for summary judgment, while the government is trying to dismiss the case. The court must decide whether to let the case move forward, and whether to evaluate the law under strict Second Amendment scrutiny as required by Bruen.
Kirk is cautiously optimistic. “If you’re going to challenge this law anywhere, the Northern District of Texas is where you want to be,” he said. But he also warned that even with a favorable ruling, the case will likely move up through the appeals courts and possibly reach the Supreme Court.
What Makes This Case Fascinating
What’s remarkable about this case is that it brings the abstract theory of Second Amendment rights down to ground level. This isn’t about gun bans or mass shootings – it’s about an everyday American buying a legal product and running into government red tape simply because of geography.
And it raises a bigger question: how many other federal rules are built on outdated or non-existent historical foundations? If this law falls, it could open the door to challenging other restrictions under the Bruen standard.
Rights Don’t Stop at State Borders
What makes the Elite Precision case so important is the principle behind it. If you have a constitutional right, why should it matter where you stand when you exercise it? A Texan shouldn’t lose their Second Amendment rights just because they’re on a business trip in Arizona.
This isn’t about loosening gun laws – it’s about making sure existing laws respect the Constitution. As FPC points out, this kind of restriction would never be tolerated for First Amendment rights or voting rights. The Second Amendment deserves the same respect.
A Case With National Implications
If the court agrees with the plaintiffs, Elite Precision v. ATF could reshape how federal gun laws are interpreted in a post-Bruen world. The government may argue the restriction is minor, but the legal and constitutional stakes are anything but small.
As William Kirk put it, “This is a righteous challenge.” And it could become a landmark case – one that forces the federal government to finally align its gun regulations with the Constitution’s original intent.
UP NEXT: “Heavily Armed” — See Which States Are The Most Strapped
Image Credit: Survival World
Americans have long debated the role of firearms, but one thing is sure — some states are far more armed than others. See where your state ranks in this new report on firearm ownership across the U.S.
The article Lawsuit Says ATF’s Interstate Handgun Ban Has No Historical Basis first appeared on Survival World.
Ed spent his childhood in the backwoods of Maine, where harsh winters taught him the value of survival skills. With a background in bushcraft and off-grid living, Ed has honed his expertise in fire-making, hunting, and wild foraging. He writes from personal experience, sharing practical tips and hands-on techniques to thrive in any outdoor environment. Whether it’s primitive camping or full-scale survival, Ed’s advice is grounded in real-life challenges.
