Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Fifth Circuit Strikes Down Federal Interstate Handgun Purchase Ban
Firearms Policy Coalition ^ | 9/18/26

Posted on 09/18/2026 2:41:21 PM PDT by CFW

NEW ORLEANS (September 18, 2026) — Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) announced today a major victory in Elite Precision Customs v. ATF, with the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit holding that the federal government’s ban on direct interstate handgun purchases violates the Second Amendment. The Court reversed the lower court’s dismissal of the case and rendered judgment for FPC and its co-plaintiffs.

[snip]

The federal laws challenged by FPC categorically prohibit people from directly purchasing handguns from licensed dealers outside their state of residence. While federal law provides exceptions for interstate rifle and shotgun purchases, handgun buyers are instead forced to arrange an additional transfer through a licensed dealer in their home state—a process that depends on another dealer agreeing to participate and typically imposes additional fees and delays.

The Fifth Circuit’s conclusion was unequivocal: “The Ban sullies the plain text of the Second Amendment and is inconsistent with the nation’s tradition of firearms regulation.” The Court reversed the district court and rendered judgment for FPC and the other plaintiffs.

(Excerpt) Read more at firearmspolicy.org ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government
KEYWORDS: 2a; 2ndamendment; banglist; fifthcircuit; firearms
In a 2-1 vote, the Fifth Circuit ruled that the federal ban on direct interstate handgun sales violates the Second Amendment.

The majority said the ban implicates the Second Amendment because the right to keep arms necessarily includes the right to purchase them. It then found the government’s historical analogues too dissimilar to justify a categorical ban on direct interstate handgun sales.

Judge Haynes issued a three-sentence dissent, saying she agreed with the district court that the challenged provisions “are not unconstitutional under the Second Amendment.” She said that was “all that is in play in this case” and would have affirmed.

Court's ruling here:

Order

1 posted on 09/18/2026 2:41:21 PM PDT by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: CFW
The Fifth Circuit’s conclusion was unequivocal.

If the conclusion was "unequivocal," how can the vote have been 2-1??

2 posted on 09/18/2026 2:50:28 PM PDT by rexthecat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFW; marktwain; PROCON

Ping!........


3 posted on 09/18/2026 3:05:48 PM PDT by Red Badger (Iryna Zarutska, May 22, 2002 Kyiv, Ukraine – August 22, 2025 Charlotte, North Carolina Say her name)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
Look at this nugget from the opinion:

“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.”

Image

Image

4 posted on 09/18/2026 3:34:06 PM PDT by CFW
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: CFW
It is noteworthy that the Trump Administration fought to keep the ban in place. This is the second time in recent memory that the Trump Administration has fought against our Second Amendment rights.

“The Ban sullies the plain text of the Second Amendment and is inconsistent with the nation’s tradition of firearms regulation, dating back to the founding era, under that Amendment.”

5 posted on 09/18/2026 3:37:41 PM PDT by thegagline (If you hate Christians, Vote Talarico. Sic semper tyrannis! Zeldin for President )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegagline

Nice try, but Trump ordered the DOJ not to appeal this decision.


6 posted on 09/18/2026 4:26:43 PM PDT by miliantnutcase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CFW

This is a big deal. I have expected a similar decision for a while.

It makes no sense to block interstate handgun sales in the current environment.


7 posted on 09/18/2026 5:56:57 PM PDT by marktwain (----------------------)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CFW

This is a good ruling for citizens rights.


8 posted on 09/18/2026 6:02:54 PM PDT by gildafarrell (To Strive, To Seek, To Find and Not To Yield!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: miliantnutcase
Nice try, but Trump ordered the DOJ not to appeal this decision.

1) The Trump administration filed its brief in support of the ban and against our Second Amendment rights with the district court in 2025. Nice try!

2) The Trump administration then fought for the ban and against our Second Amendment rights, at the Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. Nice try!

3) Trump has NOT ordered the DOJ to not to appeal the decision in Elite Precision Customs v. ATF. Trump ordered the DOJ not to file an appeal in a completely different case, Silencer Shop Foundation v. ATF. Nice try, though!

9 posted on 09/18/2026 8:13:09 PM PDT by thegagline (If you hate Christians, Vote Talarico. Sic semper tyrannis! Zeldin for President )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: CFW

Bkmk


10 posted on 09/18/2026 8:36:02 PM PDT by sauropod (Make sure Satan has to climb over a lot of Scripture to get to you. John MacArthur Ne supra crepidam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thegagline

Showing up in court and “fighting” are two different approaches to accomplish something. Just because the DOJ were in the court room doesn’t mean they put up the best case fight. They actually can go in the court room and act like tree stumps in order to get the ruling from the court that is desired. Once the judges rule then it’s law and by not putting up a furious defense the outcome might just be what was wanted.


11 posted on 09/19/2026 6:26:50 AM PDT by Flint
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: CFW

Good to see this decision.


12 posted on 09/19/2026 6:35:44 AM PDT by Fury
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Flint
Showing up in court and “fighting” are two different approaches to accomplish something.

1) The District Court case, where the Trump Administration argued against our Second Amendment rights, was heard on briefs alone. There were no oral arguments.

2) Had you bothered to read the briefs, you would see that the Trump Administration zealously fought against our Second Amendment rights both at the District Court and the Appellate Court.

3) In that you didn’t put in the work by actually reading the briefs, rather you are just arguing out of willful ignorance in defense of your idolatry, I am not going to waste my time engaging with you. Have a good day.

13 posted on 09/19/2026 8:52:12 AM PDT by thegagline (If you hate Christians, Vote Talarico. Sic semper tyrannis! Zeldin for President )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: thegagline

I know you’re mentally defective so I will speak plainly… The bums in the ATF are not in the Trump administration. Trump has recently been educated on firearms by his team and understands the harm being done to our second amendment. If you actually pay attention to what he’s been saying you might understand that.

You may now continue frothing at the mouth!


14 posted on 09/19/2026 3:02:50 PM PDT by miliantnutcase
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: miliantnutcase
I know you’re mentally defective so I will speak plainly… The bums in the ATF are not in the Trump administration.

1) The ATF is in the Executive Branch ergo, part of the Trump Administration.

2) To put a finer point on it, Trump appointed Robert Cekada as head of the ATF.

3) Both Trump’s ATF and Trump’s DOJ filed briefs to keep the anti-Second Amendment ban in place.

Now, get out of your mom’s basement, your soup is getting cold.

15 posted on 09/19/2026 4:24:27 PM PDT by thegagline (If you hate Christians, Vote Talarico. Sic semper tyrannis! Zeldin for President )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson