In what could only be described as very interesting timing, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals on March 14 upheld Florida’s law banning those under 21 years of age from buying firearms.
The ruling came at the same time that Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and Republican lawmakers in the Sunshine State are pushing legislation to get rid of the law and restore the Second Amendment rights of 18-, 19- and 20-year-old Floridians to purchase a gun.
The National Rifle Association (NRA) has been seeking to have the law overturned since the Florida Legislature passed it in 2018 in the aftermath of the Sandy Hook mass murder. The ruling by the full 7th Circuit upheld an earlier ruling by a three-judge panel of the court in the case NRA v. Bondi.
In its ruling, the court determined that the restriction met the historical precedent standard for viable gun restrictions the U.S. Supreme Court handed down in the 2022 Bruen ruling.
“The Florida law that prohibits minors from purchasing firearms does not violate the Second and Fourteenth Amendments because it is consistent with our historical tradition of firearm regulation,” Chief Judge William Prior wrote in the ruling. “From the Founding to the late-nineteenth century, our law limited the purchase of firearms by minors in different ways. The Florida law also limits the purchase of firearms by minors. And it does so for the same reason: to stop immature and impulsive individuals, like Nikolas Cruz, from harming themselves and others with deadly weapons. Those similarities are sufficient to confirm the constitutionality of the Florida law.”
In a dissenting opinion joined by three other judges, Judge Andrew Basher argued that the law did not meet the historical precedent criteria as set for in Bruen.
“There were no age-based limitations on the right to keep and bear arms either before, during, or immediately after the adoption of the Bill of Rights,” Judge Brasher wrote. “This is where the majority opinion loses its bearings. Simply put, there is nothing in our nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation that resembles Florida’s complete prohibition on an adult’s ability to purchase a firearm based only on that adult’s age. Nothing in the founding-era legal landscape is analogous to the challenged law. To the extent the history says anything about age and firearms, it says that the states and federal government expected all men over the age of 18 to be armed.”
Because of a split among circuit courts on the constitutionality of restrictions on young adults under 21, the NRA is likely to appeal the ruling. Interestingly, after the ruling, Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier, who just took office last month, said he would not defend the law further.
“Men and women old enough to fight and die for our country should be able to purchase firearms to defend themselves and their families,” Uthmeier posted on social media.
DeSantis proposed getting rid of the law during his State of the State speech on March 4.
“The free state of Florida has not exactly led the way on protecting Second Amendment rights… We need to be a strong Second Amendment state,” DeSantis said.
Why is the 7th Circuit hearing an 11th Circuit (Florida) appeal?
It’s the FLORIDA 7th Circuit State Court.
Another courtroom clown show that puts The Second Amendment under the microscope all while Gun Control and its centuries of Rot are kept out of sight and out of mind. Until so called Defenders of The Second Amendment for once question the character of Gun Control in court the scales of justice will remain tilted in favor of Gun Control. Yepper citing History the Center X kill spot for Gun Control is kept out of sight and out of mind all thanks to gutless wonders…like some on this forum.
Were you there giving testimony so the judges would learn the history you speak of? If not, why not? This is an age issue so it infringes everyone under 21. Not just one of the protected classes. What if females, real ones, were restricted? Would you bla….bla…bla…..bla……
Yes I’m sure you would.
You ever hook up with Geoff?
Might do you some good
Circuit splits starting to stack up, neat.
Under 21 stop signing up for the politicians war machine… maybe people should wait until they’re 21 to join the United States military… especially if they don’t trust someone under 21 with a gun..
Armed forces recruiting has exploded since Donald Trump won the November election and again when he took office January 20th.
What you suggest just is not going to happen.
William F Bonnie alias Billy the Kid had supposedly killed 21 men by the time he had reached the age of 21.
Our good government is trying to prevent another tragedy like that.
Once our good government have taken away all the legally owned guns from all the law abiding citizens eventually the guns used by the 14-18 year old street gangs will become nonexistent and our lives will become as safe as those who live in North Korea.
(Washington state) New Attack Is Vaguest Gun Ban Yet: Where Children Are Likely To Be Present.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e1bDIclGPYE
BREAKING: DOJ Backs Off on Claim Suppressors Aren’t Covered by 2A.
“It was just a couple of days ago when Cam took issue with a DOJ attorney claiming that suppressors weren’t “arms” and thus weren’t covered by the Second Amendment.
…
After GOA & @gunfoundation broke the news that a Biden-era holdover acting U.S. Attorney argued that suppressors were NOT arms & were NOT protected by the Second Amendment, @thejusticedept is requesting 30 days to reconsider its anti-gun brief.
This is HUGE! 🔥🔥🔥”
…
Now, this is just asking for a 30-day delay while the DOJ “reconsiders” its position, but let’s be real about what that means.
If the intention was to power through the appeal with the claim that suppressors aren’t part of the Second Amendment, it wouldn’t ask for a 30-day delay in the first place.
The only reason to ask for any such delay is with the intention of potentially backing off entirely from that idiotic argument. I’m not saying they’re going to suddenly say that suppressors shouldn’t be NFA items, mind you, but that possibility is at least on the table.
…”
https://bearingarms.com/tomknighton/2025/03/20/breaking-doj-backs-off-on-claim-suppressors-arent-covered-by-2a-n1228043