A divided federal appeals court has ruled that the government cannot categorically prohibit law-abiding Americans from purchasing handguns directly across state lines.

The Fifth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued its 2-1 decision September 18 in Elite Precision Customs v. ATF.

The panel held that three provisions of the Gun Control Act of 1968 violate the Second Amendment when they operate together to ban direct interstate handgun sales.

The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms welcomed the ruling, calling the restriction an outdated burden made even harder to justify by the modern background-check system.

How the Federal Restriction Worked

Federal law has allowed people to purchase rifles and shotguns directly from licensed dealers in other states. Those sales must comply with the laws of both states.

Handguns have been treated differently.

Someone buying a handgun from an out-of-state dealer could not take possession directly. The selling dealer had to ship the handgun to a federally licensed dealer in the buyer’s home state.

The buyer then completed the transfer through that second dealer. That process frequently added another fee and delayed possession.

The Fifth Circuit called the combined restrictions the “Nonresident Handgun Purchase Ban.”

FPC and Gun Buyers Challenged the System

The plaintiffs included Firearms Policy Coalition, Texas dealer Elite Precision Customs and two prospective customers.

Freddie Blish lives in Arizona. Tim Herron lives in New Mexico. Both said they wanted to purchase handguns directly from Elite Precision’s Texas location.

Herron told the court that intermediary dealers typically charged him between $30 and $40. The added transfer also delayed delivery.

A federal district court upheld the restrictions and dismissed the case. The Fifth Circuit reversed that decision and entered judgment for the plaintiffs.

Majority Finds No Historical Match

Judge Jerry Smith wrote the majority opinion. Judge Kurt Engelhardt joined him.

The court first concluded that the right to keep arms necessarily includes the ability to purchase them. A complete prohibition on one category of otherwise lawful purchases therefore implicates the Second Amendment.

The government then had to identify a comparable historical tradition supporting the restriction.

Federal attorneys offered colonial and early American laws addressing cross-border arms sales, wartime exports, gunpowder inspections and sales to Native American tribes.

SEE ALSO: PTR 9KT MP5K Build: My $5,008 Dream Gun

The majority found those laws too different from a modern peacetime prohibition on handgun sales between residents of different states.

“The Ban sullies the plain text of the Second Amendment,” Smith wrote, concluding that the restriction was inconsistent with America’s historical firearm regulations.

Judge Catharina Haynes dissented. She said she agreed with the district court that the challenged federal provisions were constitutional.

CCRKBA Points to NICS

CCRKBA Executive Director Andrew Gottlieb argued that the National Instant Criminal Background Check System made the restriction especially difficult to defend.

“If a person can pass a background check in Arizona, for example, that same individual can pass the same background check just across the border in New Mexico,” Gottlieb said.

NICS did not exist when Congress enacted the Gun Control Act in 1968. The federal system began operating in 1998.

CCRKBA argues that the same national background check can identify a prohibited purchaser regardless of where the transaction occurs.

However, the Fifth Circuit did not base its constitutional ruling on NICS or improved technology. Its decision rested on the Second Amendment’s text and the government’s failure to identify an adequate historical analogue.

What the Ruling Does Not Change

The decision does not eliminate NICS checks.

It also does not invalidate state permit requirements, waiting periods or other independent restrictions. Buyers and dealers would still need to comply with applicable laws.

The opinion should not be treated as an immediate nationwide green light for direct interstate handgun purchases.

The Fifth Circuit covers Texas, Louisiana and Mississippi. The ruling also directly conflicts with the Second Circuit, which upheld the same federal restrictions in United States v. Vereen.

That circuit split makes further review increasingly likely.

The Justice Department could request rehearing before the full Fifth Circuit. It could also ask the Supreme Court to hear the case.

CCRKBA said it will continue watching the litigation and hopes the ruling survives any further challenge.

For now, the decision represents a significant Second Amendment victory. Its full practical effect will depend on the mandate, any resulting injunction and the government’s next move.

*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! ***

https://gunsamerica.com/listings/search