Handgun Age Limits and the Fifth Circuit: Understanding Who Can Buy a Gun

For more than half a century, federal law has limited who can buy handguns from federally licensed gun dealers. The core rule: adults ages 18 to 20 could legally own a handgun, but they generally could not purchase one from a licensed dealer. That framework was upended when the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit held that the federal handgun purchase ban for 18–20-year-olds violates the Second Amendment.

This article explains how the federal age restrictions on handgun sales work, what the Fifth Circuit decided, why historical tradition and the Supreme Court’s Bruen standard matter, and what the ruling means for young adults and gun regulation going forward.

From the Gun Control Act to Modern Age Limits

The starting point for handgun age limits is the Gun Control Act of 1968, a major federal statute passed in response to rising crime and high-profile assassinations. Among many other provisions, the Act added age-based rules for commercial firearms sales, focusing on licensed dealers rather than private transactions.

Two key sections of federal law framed age restrictions on handgun purchases:

• 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(1) — bars licensed dealers from selling any firearm other than a shotgun or rifle to anyone the dealer knows or reasonably believes is under 21.
• 18 U.S.C. § 922(c)(1) — imposes similar restrictions for certain types of dealer transactions, reinforcing the minimum age of 21 for handgun sales by federally licensed firearms dealers.

These provisions create a distinction between long guns and handguns:

TRENDING

Nevada Assault on Protected Classes with Deadly Weapons

An in-depth overview of Nevada assault laws when deadly weapons and protected classes are involved, including penal...

Nevada Battery With Intent to Commit a Crime Explained

Comprehensive guide to Nevada battery with intent to commit a crime, legal definitions, penalties, defenses, and pr...

Nevada Domestic Battery by Strangulation: Law, Penalties and Defense

Understand Nevada domestic battery by strangulation laws, penalties, legal process, and defense options, including ...

Read More

Suing Your Employer for Sexual Harassment: A Practical Guide >

Importantly, the law regulates commercial sales by licensed dealers. It does not, by itself, criminalize possession of a handgun by 18–20-year-olds, nor does it fully prohibit them from obtaining handguns through non-dealer channels like gifts or some private transfers.

How Federal Age Restrictions Work in Practice

Under the pre-existing federal framework, a typical 19-year-old faced different rules depending on the type of firearm and the source:

• They could legally buy a shotgun or rifle from a federally licensed dealer, assuming they passed a background check.
• They could not buy a handgun from a licensed dealer because of the 21-year minimum.
• They could, in many circumstances, legally possess a handgun obtained through non-dealer means, such as a gift from a parent, depending on state law.

Federal law thus treated 18–20-year-olds as adults for some purposes (owning or receiving handguns, purchasing long guns) but not for direct handgun purchases from dealers. The underlying policy judgment was that handguns, often used in urban crime, warranted stricter age thresholds than long guns commonly associated with hunting or sporting use.

Second Amendment Law Before Bruen

For years, courts tended to uphold age-based firearm restrictions. In 2012, the Fifth Circuit itself previously concluded that the federal handgun purchase age limit was constitutional, viewing it as a reasonable regulation consistent with public safety and earlier Second Amendment precedents. At that time, many courts applied a multi-step scrutiny framework that weighed government interests against the burden on gun rights.

That approach changed dramatically in 2022 when the Supreme Court decided New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen. In Bruen, the Court rejected the means-ends balancing tests used by lower courts and replaced them with an explicitly historical method for judging firearm regulations.

The Bruen Standard: Text and Historical Tradition

Bruen established a two-part inquiry for Second Amendment cases:

• Step 1: Textual coverage — Does the Second Amendment’s plain text protect the person and conduct at issue?
• Step 2: Historical justification — If the conduct is covered, the government must justify the regulation by pointing to a well-established historical tradition of comparable firearm regulation.

Under this framework, courts no longer balance modern policy concerns against gun rights. Instead, they ask whether analogous restrictions existed around the founding era or during other relevant historical periods. If the government cannot show that the challenged law fits into that tradition, the regulation is unconstitutional, even if legislators believe it serves contemporary safety goals.

Reese v. ATF: The Fifth Circuit Declares the Handgun Ban Unconstitutional

In Reese v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, decided on January 30, 2025, the Fifth Circuit revisited the federal handgun purchase ban in light of Bruen. The plaintiffs, adults aged 18–20, challenged the federal statutes and related regulations that prevented them from buying handguns from federally licensed dealers.

The Fifth Circuit framed the dispute around two central questions: whether 18–20-year-olds are included among “the people” whose rights the Second Amendment protects, and whether historical evidence supported age-based restrictions on acquiring handguns from commercial dealers.

Step 1: Are 18–20-year-olds within “the people”?

The court first concluded that the Second Amendment’s text applies to 18–20-year-olds. The opinion emphasized that the term “the people” in the Constitution generally refers to members of the national community, including law-abiding adult citizens.

The Fifth Circuit reasoned that because young adults in this age range can vote, serve in the military, and be treated as adults for various legal purposes, they fall within the protected class. Moreover, the right to “keep and bear arms” necessarily implies a right to acquire firearms; a right that cannot be exercised in practice is effectively hollow.

Step 2: Is there a historical tradition of similar age-based bans?

At the second stage, the government had to show that the federal ban was consistent with historical restrictions on young adults’ firearm access. The Fifth Circuit examined founding-era laws and early national practice to see whether age-based bans on commercial handgun purchases were part of the country’s tradition.

According to the court, the federal government offered only limited evidence of age-related firearm regulations, and those examples did not closely mirror a broad prohibition on commercial handgun purchases for law-abiding adults based solely on age. The court underscored several points:

• Founding-era militia obligations often required service from young adults, suggesting they were expected to have access to arms.
• Regulations targeting misuse, such as laws against going armed to the terror of the people, did not categorically exclude a class of adults from acquiring guns.
• The federal handgun purchase ban dates to the late 1960s, far removed from the founding period and not supported by consistent historical analogues.

The court concluded that the federal age-based handgun ban conflicts with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Because the government failed to show a sufficiently analogous legacy of treating 18–20-year-olds as outside the Second Amendment’s protection in this way, the statutes and related regulations were held unconstitutional.

What Reese Means in the Fifth Circuit’s States

The Fifth Circuit’s jurisdiction covers Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. Within those states, the Reese decision signals that federal law cannot be enforced to prohibit licensed dealers from selling handguns to law-abiding customers aged 18–20, at least under the reasoning adopted by the panel.

However, several important caveats remain:

• The ruling concerns federal handgun sales restrictions; state-level age limits may still apply if they differ and have not been struck down.
• The decision does not remove background check requirements or other federal conditions on firearm purchases; it only addresses age-based bans.
• Outside the Fifth Circuit, other courts have reached different conclusions about similar age restrictions.

In effect, the decision creates geographic variation in the legality of age-based handgun purchase limits, unless and until the Supreme Court resolves the conflict among circuits.

Conflicting Decisions in Other Federal Circuits

Reese does not stand alone. Other federal appellate courts have confronted age restrictions on firearms and reached varying outcomes. Recent decisions illustrate the emerging split:

• The Fourth Circuit has upheld federal age restrictions on handgun purchases, concluding that they are consistent with historical tradition even under the Bruen framework.
• The Eleventh Circuit upheld Florida’s requirement that a person be at least 21 to buy any firearm, a law enacted after the 2018 Parkland school shooting.

These rulings contrast with the Fifth Circuit’s position and highlight continuing disagreement about how to apply Bruen to age-based regulations. The Supreme Court recently declined to immediately take up some age restriction cases, leaving the circuit split in place for now.

Policy Arguments: Safety Concerns vs. Constitutional Text

Debates over handgun age limits involve both empirical and constitutional questions. Supporters of higher age thresholds often emphasize crime and violence statistics, arguing that restricting handgun access for young adults can reduce risk:

• Handguns are frequently used in homicides and violent crimes, especially in urban areas.
• Concerns about impulsive behavior, developmental maturity, and higher rates of risky conduct among late adolescents and young adults motivate calls for stricter limits.

Opponents of age-based bans counter that these rules punish law-abiding young adults while doing little to deter criminal misuse. They stress constitutional text and historical practice:

• The Second Amendment refers broadly to “the people,” not differentiating based on age once individuals are treated as adults in other legal contexts.
• Founding-era traditions often expected young adults to participate in militia service and to possess arms, undercutting categorical age exclusions.

Under the Bruen framework, contemporary crime data and policy preferences play little role. Instead, the question is whether age-based bans can be firmly anchored in historical analogues, a standard that some courts find demanding and others interpret more flexibly.

Practical Implications for Young Adults

For 18–20-year-olds living in states within the Fifth Circuit, the Reese decision has concrete consequences:

• Access to licensed dealers: They may be able to purchase handguns directly from federally licensed dealers, subject to background checks and any remaining state restrictions.
• Compliance complexity: Dealers must navigate evolving case law and federal guidance to ensure they comply with both the court’s ruling and federal regulations that may not yet be fully updated.
• State-level variation: Even where the federal ban is invalidated, individual states can adopt their own age limits, provided those limits survive constitutional challenges.

Young adults and gun dealers should monitor further litigation and potential regulatory changes, since the legal landscape for age-based firearm restrictions remains unsettled and may change if the Supreme Court eventually weighs in on the issue.

Key Takeaways in Bullet Form

• Federal law historically barred licensed dealers from selling handguns to buyers under 21, while allowing long gun purchases at 18.
• The Supreme Court’s Bruen decision shifted Second Amendment analysis to a text-and-history test.
• The Fifth Circuit in Reese v. ATF held the federal handgun purchase ban for 18–20-year-olds unconstitutional.
• The ruling applies in Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas but conflicts with decisions in other circuits.
• Policy debates now turn on historical analogues more than contemporary public safety arguments.

Frequently Asked Questions

Are 18–20-year-olds now allowed to buy handguns everywhere in the United States?

No. The Fifth Circuit’s decision applies directly only in the states within its jurisdiction: Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. Other circuits have upheld similar age restrictions, and state laws can still impose their own limits. The national picture remains divided until the Supreme Court resolves the split.

Does the Fifth Circuit ruling affect the legal age to buy rifles or shotguns?

Not directly. Federal law already allowed adults 18 and older to purchase rifles and shotguns from licensed dealers. The Reese decision focuses on handguns and the specific federal provisions that set 21 as the minimum age for handgun purchases from licensed dealers.

Can 18–20-year-olds possess handguns even if they cannot buy them from dealers?

Under federal law, the age restrictions focus on sales by licensed dealers and do not categorically ban possession by 18–20-year-olds. However, state and local laws may impose additional rules on possession or carrying, so individuals must consult the laws in their jurisdiction.

What role did Bruen play in the Fifth Circuit’s decision?

Bruen required courts to assess gun laws based on constitutional text and historical tradition rather than balancing interests like public safety against rights. Applying this test, the Fifth Circuit concluded that the federal government failed to identify an adequate historical tradition supporting a categorical handgun purchase ban for 18–20-year-old adults.

Could the Supreme Court overturn the Fifth Circuit’s ruling?

Yes. The Supreme Court has the final word on constitutional interpretation. It recently declined to immediately take up some firearm age restriction cases, but it could grant review in a future case, especially given the differing positions among federal circuits. A Supreme Court decision could either affirm the Fifth Circuit’s approach or restore age-based limits nationwide.

Similar Articles

Nevada Armed Robbery Laws and Penalties

Nevada Assault on Protected Classes with Deadly Weapons

Nevada Battery With Intent to Commit a Crime Explained

Nevada Domestic Battery by Strangulation: Law, Penalties and Defense

Suing Your Employer for Sexual Harassment: A Practical Guide

Nevada Law on Evading Police and Causing Endangerment

Author

Sneha TeteBeauty & Lifestyle Writer

 

Sneha is a relationships and lifestyle writer with a strong foundation in applied linguistics and certified training in relationship coaching. She brings over five years of writing experience to waytolegal,  crafting thoughtful, research-driven content that empowers readers to build healthier relationships, boost emotional well-being, and embrace holistic living.

Read full bio of Sneha Tete