The Trump Department of Justice issued an advisory opinion declaring that federal laws prohibiting licensed firearms dealers from selling handguns to adults under 21 violate the Second Amendment based on Supreme Court precedent.
The advisory opinion relies on the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen, which established that firearm regulations must align with historical tradition and the Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation. The Trump DOJ concluded that the federal age restriction on handgun sales to federally licensed dealers lacks sufficient historical pedigree to survive constitutional scrutiny under that framework.
Federal law currently prohibits licensed dealers from selling handguns to anyone under 21 and long guns to anyone under 18. These restrictions originated in the Gun Control Act of 1968. The Trump administration's opinion challenges the 21-year-old handgun restriction as unconstitutional, arguing that historical analogues do not support such an age cutoff.
This advisory opinion carries significant practical implications. It signals the Trump DOJ's position on Second Amendment interpretation and could influence federal prosecutors' enforcement decisions and litigation strategy. However, advisory opinions do not bind courts or create law. The actual constitutional status of these age restrictions will ultimately depend on federal courts, including potentially the Supreme Court, should the issue reach that level.
Gun rights advocates have challenged the handgun age restrictions in multiple lawsuits. The Bruen standard has already prompted courts nationwide to reconsider various firearm regulations. This advisory opinion throws DOJ weight behind arguments that the age restrictions fail constitutional muster, providing legal ammunition to plaintiffs in pending cases.
The opinion reflects the Trump administration's Second Amendment jurisprudence favoring expansive gun ownership rights. It contrasts sharply with the Biden administration's position defending firearm regulations as constitutional exercises of congressional power to regulate interstate commerce and public safety.
Any court ruling invalidating or