Key Takeaways
- The Second Amendment Foundation and partners are appealing a court ruling that limits a handgun sales ban relief to certain members.
- They argue the federal court’s decision in Reese v. BATFE violates the Second Amendment for adults ages 18-20.
- The district court’s judgment only protects members in the Fifth Circuit and as of January 27, 2026, which the groups contest.
- They claim the government could have sought Supreme Court review but chose not to, thus undermining broader relief.
- The appeal maintains that gun rights should not be restricted by state boundaries and that all affected adults deserve full protection.
Estimated reading time: 3 minutes
NEW ORLEANS, LA — The Second Amendment Foundation and two partner organizations have asked the Fifth Circuit to expand a court victory that struck down the federal ban on handgun sales to adults under 21, arguing the relief they won is being withheld from most of their members.
In an opening brief filed June 22, 2026, as announced by the Second Amendment Foundation, the groups challenged how a federal district court applied last year’s ruling.
The dispute traces back to Reese v. BATFE, where the Fifth Circuit held in January 2025 that the federal prohibition on licensed handgun and handgun ammunition sales to 18-to-20-year-olds violates the Second Amendment. The court found that adults in that age range are part of “the people” whose right to keep and bear arms is protected.
The government chose not to ask the Supreme Court to review that decision.
On remand, the district court entered judgment for the plaintiffs but sharply narrowed the remedy. It limited the injunction to members living within the Fifth Circuit (Texas, Mississippi, and Louisiana), and only to those who were members as of the date judgment was entered on January 27, 2026.
SAF and its partners, Firearms Policy Coalition and the Louisiana Shooting Association, argue both limits are unsupported by law and leave the government free to keep enforcing an unconstitutional ban against the vast majority of their members.
More from USA Carry:
The brief contends the government tried to make the win “a victory in name only.” It leans on the long-settled principle that courts should grant a prevailing party complete relief, not a remedy carved down to a fraction of those harmed.
SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb said, “There is no doubt adults in this age range are part of ‘the People.'”
The groups also point out that the government, unlike private litigants, is not bound by this loss in any way that would justify limiting who benefits from it. If the government wanted to contain the nationwide reach of the ruling, they argue, it could have sought Supreme Court review and chose not to.
A related case, West Virginia Citizens Defense League v. ATF, challenges the same federal law and is awaiting word on whether the Supreme Court will take it up.
A court victory that protects only some law-abiding adults in three states is no real victory, and the right to keep and bear arms does not stop at a circuit boundary. I will continue tracking this appeal as the Fifth Circuit weighs whether to restore the full relief these young adults are owed.
