In layman’s terms: The 10th Circuit Court of Appeals court decided restrictions on 18-20 year old adults owning firearms is Constitutional.
Another court has decided that 18-20 year-olds are somehow exempted from Constitutional rights to keep and bear firearms.
On Tuesday, November 5, (ironically the same day that young people exercise their right to vote), the United States Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit reversed a district court’s preliminary injunction against Colorado Senate Bill 23-169 which raised the minimum age to purchase a firearm in Colorado from 18 to 21.
The case, known as Rocky Mountain Gun Owners v. Polis, initially received a pro-gun ruling from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado on August 7, 2023. SB23-169 specifically infringed on the rights of legal adults by changing Colorado law to include the following restrictions:
- Seller restriction. “A person who is not a licensed gun dealer shall not make or facilitate the sale of a firearm to a person who is less than twenty-one years of age.”
- Buyer restriction. “It is unlawful for a person who is less than twenty-one years of age to purchase a firearm.”
In their 100-page decision, the 10th Circuit dismissed one of the plaintiffs from the case because they had turned 21 during the course of the litigation and deemed it as moot.
The court’s decision to overturn the preliminary injunction turned on the application of the “common use” principle in Heller as applied to the Bruen test. Vice President of the National Foundation for Gun Rights, Hannah Hill, argues that this is an erroneous and flawed argument, noting, “The Heller loophole strikes again.”
The court uses the following as a loophole to wiggle out of the relatively simple Bruen standard, even after admitting that plaintiff Pineda is “part of “the people” as defined by the Second Amendment”:
…embedded within the quartet of recent Supreme Court Second Amendment cases is the recognition that certain “longstanding” regulations – including “laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms” – are ‘presumptively lawful’.
The court amazingly ignores both the simple 27 words of the Second Amendment and the Bruen test and arrives at this most unconstitutional position:
We turn now to whether SB 23-169 is covered by Heller’s presumption of legality for “laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.” Heller, 554 U.S. at 626–27. We hold that as an aged-based condition or qualification on the sale of arms, SB 23-169 is covered by the safe harbor and, as such, falls outside of the scope of the Second Amendment’s right to “keep and bear” arms.
As Ms. Hill notes, “And there it is. The 10th Circuit panel says that an age-based purchase restriction is a “presumptively lawful” commercial sale regulation. And they got there by dodging the Bruen test entirely.”
Plaintiffs will of course appeal this decision. There are numerous cases in other circuits that also address restrictions on firearms ownership for adults aged 18-20. We will continue to cover this case.
Tyrants in black robes!