Reported / Citable
Background
Elite Precision Customs, a federally licensed firearms manufacturer and dealer in Texas, wanted to sell handguns directly to customers in other states. Two prospective customers, Arizona resident Freddie Blish and New Mexico resident Tim Herron, wanted to make such purchases. They joined the Firearms Policy Coalition in challenging provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 922 that collectively prohibit direct interstate handgun sales between unlicensed persons and bar licensed dealers from directly selling handguns to nonresidents.
An out-of-state buyer can obtain a handgun through an intermediary federally licensed dealer in the buyer’s home state, but that process depends on the intermediary’s participation and generally adds fees and delay. The plaintiffs sought a permanent injunction, arguing that the statutory scheme and a parallel ATF regulation violated the Second Amendment. The district court granted the government’s motion to dismiss and denied the plaintiffs’ summary-judgment motion.
The Court’s Holding
The Fifth Circuit held that the challenged provisions violate the Second Amendment. At the first step of the test established in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, the majority concluded that the right to keep arms necessarily encompasses the right to purchase them. Because the provisions categorically prohibit direct interstate handgun purchases, the court held that they burden conduct covered by the Second Amendment’s text. The availability of dealer-to-dealer transfers did not change that conclusion.
At Bruen’s second step, the majority held that the government failed to identify a sufficiently analogous historical tradition. The cited laws addressed wartime defense, commerce with foreign sovereigns or Indian tribes, and product quality or consumer protection—not peacetime handgun transactions across state lines within a single nation. Rejecting the Second Circuit’s contrary approach, the majority reversed the dismissal and rendered judgment for the plaintiffs. Judge Haynes dissented and would have affirmed the district court.
Key Takeaways
- The Second Amendment’s protection of keeping arms includes the right to purchase firearms.
- A lawful dealer-to-dealer transfer option does not prevent a categorical ban on direct interstate handgun sales from burdening protected conduct.
- Historical laws regulating wartime exports, foreign or tribal commerce, and firearm quality were not sufficiently analogous to the modern interstate-sales ban.
Why It Matters
The decision invalidates, within the Fifth Circuit, the federal statutory scheme barring direct handgun sales across state lines and creates a direct disagreement with the Second Circuit. It also reinforces the Fifth Circuit’s view that even purchase restrictions leaving alternative acquisition methods available must undergo Bruen’s historical-tradition analysis.
The ruling further signals that courts may not justify modern firearms restrictions by describing historical regulations at a high level of generality. The government must show meaningful similarity in both why the historical laws were enacted and how they burdened Second Amendment rights.