Vern Evans
An October 22 start date has been announced for the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals to begin hearing arguments in the National Rifle Association’s case challenging Florida’s ban on long gun purchase by adults 18 to 20 years old.
In early March, a three-judge panel of the 11th Circuit Court upheld the ban in the case NRA v. Bondi, ruling the restriction constitutional under the Second Amendment.
In 2018, the state hastily passed the law following the tragic mass murder at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida. The law prohibits anyone under age of 21 from purchasing a firearm and creates criminal penalties for both underage purchasers and those who sell to under-21-year-olds.
In a brief filed in July for the upcoming proceedings, the NRA outlined several reasons why the court should rule the age restriction unconstitutional.
“In Florida, persons aged 18 and older are legal adults for purposes of the civil rights and obligations of adulthood,” the brief stated. “Florida’s young adult citizens aged 18 to 20 can vote, contract, and marry. They may be required to appear for jury duty. And they may choose to risk life and limb by serving in our military or Florida’s law enforcement agencies. But they face prison for exercising their right to buy a firearm because Florida bans young adults from purchasing any firearm for any reason.”
As the brief discussed, this restriction runs afoul of the 2022 Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.
“This law is unconstitutional,” the brief continued. “The Second Amendment’s text protects young adults’ right to purchase a firearm, and the State has not proven that the ban is consistent with our Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. The Young Adult Ban cannot stand. The district court upheld the ban without the benefit and guidance of Bruen. After the Supreme Court decided Bruen, a panel of this Court affirmed based on a motley assortment of incomparable and far-too-late laws from the Reconstruction Era that contradict the Founding Era tradition permitting and requiring young adults to acquire firearms.”
For its part, the state argued in a brief filed on August 30 that there was historical precedent for the court to uphold the law.
“The law prohibits only purchase of firearms by and sale to 18-to-20-year-olds,” the brief stated. “The Second Amendment does not forbid that modest and temporary restriction. At the time of the Founding, under-21-year-olds lacked the capacity to enter into contracts for firearms. At the time, as well, contracting was the only practical way to purchase a firearm. And when the States enacted laws organizing their militias in response to the Militia Act of 1792, they overwhelmingly recognized that feature of common law.”
Interestingly, the Florida House passed legislation in March to amend Florida’s minimum age requirement for purchasing or acquiring firearms from licensed dealers from 21 back to 18 years of age. However, that measure later died in the state Senate.
The timing for the en banc hearing by the 11th Circuit Court comes only four months after another Circuit Court struck down Minnesota’s law that prohibits 18- to 20-year-olds from being eligible for a carry permit. In that case, the state argued that 18- to 20-year-olds were not “the people” mentioned in the Second Amendment.
In a straightforward application of Bruen, that court concluded that young adults are “the people,” and no relevant history or tradition supported an age-based ban on their carrying of firearms.
“Ordinary, law-abiding, adult citizens that are 18- to 20-year-olds are members of the people because: (1) they are members of the political community under Heller’s “political community” definition; (2) the people has a fixed definition, though not fixed contents; (3) they are adults; and (4) the Second Amendment does not have a freestanding, extratextual dangerousness catchall,” that court ruled.
Read the full article here