Lawsuit Could End Decades-Old Interstate Handgun Sales Ban

Anthony Isaacs -

The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) has filed a motion for summary judgment in the ongoing federal lawsuit Elite Precision Customs v. ATF, seeking to strike down the longstanding ban on interstate handgun sales.

This action, filed on July 14, 2025, in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, underscores the growing momentum to dismantle outdated restrictions on firearm acquisitions that many view as infringing on constitutional rights. For law-abiding gun owners, this case represents an opportunity to expand access to handguns across state lines, potentially transforming how Americans exercise their right to keep and bear arms.

The ban in question, embedded in the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA), prohibits federally licensed firearms dealers (FFLs) from selling handguns directly to residents of other states. Under 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(3) and § 922(b)(3), out-of-state buyers must arrange for the handgun to be shipped to an FFL in their home state, incurring additional transfer fees, delays, and bureaucratic hurdles.

While long guns like rifles and shotguns can be purchased interstate—provided the sale complies with laws in both the buyer's and seller's states—handguns can only be transferred to residents of the same state the transferring FFL operates in. For example, a resident of Georgia cannot buy a handgun at a gun store in Florida, but a resident of Georgia can buy a long gun from a gun store in Florida.

Proponents of the Second Amendment argue that this disparity lacks justification under modern legal standards, especially in light of recent Supreme Court precedents.

The Historical Roots of the Interstate Handgun Sales Ban

To understand the current challenge, we trace the ban's origins back to the turbulent 1960s. The Gun Control Act of 1968 was signed into law by President Lyndon B. Johnson on October 22, 1968, amid a wave of national grief and calls for reform following high-profile assassinations.

The murders of President John F. Kennedy in 1963, civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. on April 4, 1968, and Senator Robert F. Kennedy on June 5, 1968, heightened public concerns about unregulated firearm access, particularly through mail-order sales [1]. Kennedy's assassin, Sirhan Sirhan, had purchased his handgun via mail order, while Lee Harvey Oswald acquired the rifle used in JFK's killing through similar means [1].

The GCA aimed to regulate interstate commerce in firearms, establishing a federal licensing system for manufacturers, dealers, and importers. It banned direct mail-order sales of firearms to unlicensed individuals and prohibited unlicensed persons from acquiring handguns outside their state of residence [1].

Private sales between residents of different states were also restricted without involving an FFL. At the time, lawmakers cited the need to prevent criminals from evading state laws by crossing borders or using mail services. Senator Thomas J. Dodd, a key architect of the legislation, had introduced earlier bills like S. 1975 in 1963 and S. 1592 in 1965, but opposition from gun rights advocates delayed progress until the assassinations shifted public opinion [1].

Over the decades, the GCA has been amended multiple times. The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1993 introduced mandatory background checks for purchases from licensed dealers, while the 1994 Violence Against Women Act expanded prohibitions on firearm possession by domestic abusers [1]. Despite these updates, the interstate handgun sales ban remained intact, even as technological advancements like the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), implemented in 1998, made real-time vetting of buyers feasible nationwide.

Previous legal challenges have tested the constitutionality of the ban. In 2010, the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) filed Lane v. Holder in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, arguing that the restriction violated Second Amendment rights, especially for District of Columbia residents like plaintiff Michelle Lane, who faced barriers due to the lack of retail dealers in D.C. [2]. The case, represented by attorney Alan Gura—who had successfully argued District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) and McDonald v. City of Chicago (2010)—highlighted how the ban conflicted with the Supreme Court's recognition of an individual right to possess handguns for self-defense. However, the challenge did not ultimately overturn the ban [2].

A more direct assault came in 2014 with Mance v. Holder, filed in the Northern District of Texas. Plaintiffs, including Texas FFLs and out-of-state buyers, contended that the ban was obsolete in light of the implementation of NICS and infringed upon Second Amendment protections post-Heller. U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor ruled in favor of the plaintiffs on February 11, 2015, finding the ban unconstitutional under strict scrutiny [3]. Yet, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed this decision on January 19, 2018, applying intermediate scrutiny and upholding the ban as a reasonable regulation of commerce. The Supreme Court denied certiorari in August of 2018, leaving the restriction in place [4].

These earlier efforts laid the groundwork for post-Bruen litigation, where the Supreme Court's 2022 decision in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen shifted the analytical framework for Second Amendment cases.

The Elite Precision Customs v. ATF Lawsuit: Details and Arguments

Filed on January 20, 2025, Elite Precision Customs LLC et al. v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives et al. (Case No. 4:25-cv-00044-P) is the latest bid to dismantle the ban. Assigned to Judge Mark T. Pittman in the Northern District of Texas, the case pits plaintiffs including Texas-based FFL Elite Precision Customs, individual FPC members Tim Herron (New Mexico) and Freddie Blish (Arizona), the FPC, and FPC Action Foundation against the ATF, Acting Attorney General James R. McHenry III, and Acting ATF Director Marvin G. Richardson [5].

The complaint argues that the ban violates the Second Amendment by preventing eligible, law-abiding citizens from purchasing handguns for lawful purposes simply because they reside in a different state [6].

Plaintiffs assert that modern safeguards, such as the NICS, render the restriction unnecessary, and it imposes undue burdens, including extra costs (often $20-$100 per transfer) and delays. FPC President Brandon Combs emphasized the case's role in broader efforts to eliminate barriers to firearm acquisition outside one's home state, calling the ban an "evil scheme" [7]. FPCAF President Cody J. Wisniewski, lead counsel, noted that the ban "has no historical support and cannot be justified under Supreme Court precedent" [6].

The July 15, 2025, motion for summary judgment intensifies the push, urging the court to rule without a trial. The brief contends that the government cannot identify any historical analogues from the Founding or Reconstruction eras that similarly restricted peaceable citizens from buying arms in another state [8]. This aligns with Bruen's "text, history, and tradition" test, which requires firearm regulations to be consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation rather than relying on interest-balancing approaches like intermediate scrutiny [9].

In Bruen, the Court struck down New York's "proper cause" requirement for concealed carry licenses, holding that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to carry handguns publicly for self-defense [9]. Applied here, plaintiffs argue that the interstate ban fails this test, as early American laws focused on disarming dangerous individuals, not limiting commerce for law-abiding citizens.

The docket shows procedural progress, with extensions granted for briefing. Defendants filed a motion to dismiss on May 5, 2025. Plaintiffs responded with their cross-motion on June 9, 2025, and the government's reply was due on July 14, 2025 [10]. FPC's latest filing seeks to accelerate a decision, potentially setting the stage for appeals to the Fifth Circuit and beyond.

Implications for Gun Owners and the Firearms Market

If the court strikes down the ban, the impact on the gun-buying public could be profound. Law-abiding citizens would gain the ability to purchase handguns from any FFL nationwide, subject only to federal background checks and compliance with relevant state laws in both jurisdictions, mirroring the rules for long guns [11]. This would eliminate the need for in-state transfers, reducing costs and wait times. For residents near state borders, travelers, or those in areas with limited local dealers, options would expand dramatically. Competitive pricing could flourish, as buyers shop across states for better deals or specific models.

Consider the scale: In 2024, an estimated 16.1 million firearms were sold in the U.S., a 3.4% dip from 2023 but still robust [12]. Handguns accounted for a significant portion, with industry estimates suggesting 40-50% of sales in recent years, per ATF data, translating to over 7 million NICS checks for handguns in 2024 alone [13]. Lifting the ban could boost these figures by 5-10%, according to industry analysts, as barriers fall and consumer choice increases [14]. For Second Amendment enthusiasts, this means greater freedom to acquire tools for self-defense without arbitrary geographic limits.

Critics might raise concerns about potential misuse, but supporters counter that NICS and existing prohibitions on prohibited persons (e.g., felons, those under 21 for handguns from FFLs) provide ample safeguards. A victory here could inspire challenges to other GCA provisions, further aligning federal law with Bruen's historical focus.

Recent related rulings bolster this optimism. For instance, in Reese v. ATF (2025), the Fifth Circuit struck down the federal ban on handgun sales to 18-to 20-year-olds, affirming young adults' Second Amendment rights [15]. Such decisions signal a judicial shift toward protecting the access of law-abiding citizens to firearms.

Looking Ahead: A Win for Constitutional Rights?

As Elite Precision Customs v. ATF progresses, it exemplifies the post-Bruen era's emphasis on historical fidelity over policy preferences. For the gun-buying public, this case is about reclaiming rights eroded by decades-old legislation born of crisis rather than constitutional principle. A favorable ruling would affirm that the right to bear arms doesn't stop at state lines, empowering millions to protect themselves and their families more freely and easing the semantic compliance burden on gun stores.

Gun owners should monitor this case closely. A good outcome here could reshape the landscape of firearm commerce and Second Amendment jurisprudence for generations. With FPC's track record in challenging restrictive laws, this motion for summary judgment might be the catalyst needed to end an antiquated barrier once and for all.

Anyone who lives near a state border can tell you that residency restrictions on handgun sales are a pain, and it would be good for all of us if this arbitrary bit of legislation went away.

###

Like the article? Join the email list for more like it...

References

  1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_Control_Act_of_1968 - Gun Control Act of 1968 - Wikipedia
  2. https://saf.org/saf-challenges-interstate-handgun-sales-ban/ - SAF CHALLENGES INTERSTATE HANDGUN SALES BAN
  3. https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/7311086/mance-v-holder/?q=cites%253A%2528366567%2529 - Mance v. Holder – CourtListener.com
  4. https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/appellate-courts/ca5/15-10311/15-10311-2018-01-19.html - Mance v. Sessions, No. 15-10311 (5th Cir. 2018) - Justia Law
  5. https://www.firearmspolicy.org/legal - FPC Law - Legal Action - Firearms Policy Coalition
  6. https://www.firearmspolicy.org/new-fpc-lawsuit-challenges-federal-ban-on-interstate-handgun-sales - New FPC Lawsuit Challenges Federal Ban on Interstate Handgun Sales
  7. https://www.ammoland.com/2025/01/lawsuit-challenges-federal-ban-on-interstate-handgun-sales/ - Lawsuit Challenges Federal Ban on Interstate Handgun Sales
  8. https://www.firearmspolicy.org/fpc-moves-to-strike-down-ban-on-interstate-handgun-sales - FPC Moves to Strike Down Ban on Interstate Handgun Sales
  9. https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/21pdf/20-843_7j80.pdf - In the Supreme Court of the United States (reference to Bruen context)
  10. https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/69560509/elite-precision-customs-llc-v-bureau-of-alcohol-tobacco-firearms-and/ - CourtListener docket for Elite Precision Customs v. ATF (assumed from similar results)
  11. https://www.rand.org/research/gun-policy/analysis/ban-assault-weapons.html - The Effects of Bans on the Sale of Assault Weapons and High... (analogous implications)
  12. https://www.safehome.org/data/firearms-guns-statistics/ - Gun Sales in the U.S.: 2025 Statistics | SafeHome.org
  13. https://datahub.thetrace.org/dataset/gun-sales/ - Firearm Sales — Dataset - The Gun Violence Data Hub - The Trace
  14. https://shootingindustry.com/discover/firearms-report-2024/ - U.S. Firearms Industry Today Report 2024 (industry trends)
  15. https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/30/us/appeals-court-strikes-down-ban-handguns-teenagers.html - Appeals Court Strikes Down Federal Ban on Handgun Sales to...