That is essentially the question answered by the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals in Reese v. BATFE, No. 23-3003 (5th Circuit 2025) when it considered whether eighteen- to twenty-year-old persons have the right to purchase handguns from Federal Firearm Licensees. Spoiler: Reese 1; BATFE 0.
The Second Amendment Covers More than the right ‘to own and bear arms.’
“[T]he words ‘purchase,’ ‘sale,’ or similar terms describing a transaction do not appear in the Second Amendment. But the right to ‘keep and bear arms’ surely implies the right to purchase them.” Reese, 9. Also See Luis v. United States, 578 U.S. 5, 26, 136 S. Ct. 1083, 1097 (2016) (Thomas, J., concurring) (“Constitutional rights…implicitly protect those closely related acts necessary to their exercise.”); see also Teixeira v. Cnty. of Alameda, 873 F.3d 670, 677 (9th Cir. 2017) (“[T]he core Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms for self- defense ‘wouldn’t mean much’ without the ability to acquire arms.”) (quoting Ezell v. City of Chicago, 651 F.3d 684, 704 (7th Cir. 2011)); Antonin Scalia & Bryan A. Garner, Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts 96 (2012) (When “a text authorizes a certain act, it implicitly authorizes whatever is a necessary predicate of that act.”).
Because ‘owning and bearing’ arms would not be realistic without the foreseeable and common act of acquiring firearms, the right to purchase arms is included in the protection of the Second Amendment. This raises an interesting question of whether the right to discharge a firearm for practice is also included in the Second Amendment.
Eighteen to Twenty Year Olds are “People.”
No really. They’re people. ‘The people’ included in the protection of the Second Amendment contain “no age or maturity restrictions in the plain text of the Amendment, as there are in other constitutional provisions. See, e.g., U.S. Const. art. I, § 2, cl. 2 (members of the House of Representatives must be at least 25 years old). This suggests that the Second Amendment lacks a minimum age requirement. See, e.g., Scalia & Garner, supra, at 93–100 (discussing the “omitted-case canon—the principle that what a text does not provide is unprovided”).” Reese, 11. (cites and quotations in original).
Further, the historic militia, a subset of the people whom the Second Amendment explicitly includes, included eighteen- to twenty-year-olds. The Militia Act of 1792 provides in part:
That each and every free able-bodied white male citizen of the respective states, resident therein, who is or shall be of the age of eighteen years, and under the age of forty-five years (except as is herein excepted) shall severally and respectively be enrolled in the militia . . . . And it shall at all time hereafter be the duty of every such captain or commanding officer of a company to enroll every such citizen, as aforesaid, and also those who shall, from time to time, arrive at the age of eighteen years . . . . That every citizen so enrolled and notified, shall, within six months thereafter, provide himself with a good musket or firelock, . . . [and] a pouch with a box therein to contain not less than twenty-four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock; . . . or with a good rifle, . . . [and] twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle . . . .
Act of May 8, 1792, 1 Stat. 271, 271. Similar provisions were provided in laws of the colonies and the young states at the adoption of the Constitution and the Second Amendment. See David B. Kopel & Joseph G. S. Greenlee, The Second Amendment Rights of Young Adults, 43 S. Ill. U. L.J. 495, 533, 579 (2019) (“Rights of Young Adults”)(discussing varying ages for militia service under the colonial laws of Virginia). “Apart from this example, colonial legislatures consistently set the minimum militia age at eighteen, and in some cases even lower.” Reese, 17 (citing Kopel & Greenlee. at 533); also see Miller, 307 U.S. at 180–81, 59 S. Ct. at 819 (discussing Massachusetts and New York laws from 1784 and 1786, respectively, that required able-bodied men from sixteen to forty-five to enroll in the militia, and “provide himself, at his own Expense, with a good Musket”).
Absent an explicit age limitation, and in light of the historical evidence that the militia largely included eighteen- to twenty-year-olds without further consideration, the Court concludes that these persons are part of ‘the people’ protected by the Second Amendment.
The Tradition of Firearm Regulation Does Not Support this Prohibition
“According to Bruen, the next question is whether restricting eighteen-to-twenty-year-olds from purchasing handguns from FFLs is ‘consistent with this Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.’” Reese, 19 (citing New York State Rifle and Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen 597 U.S. 1, 17, 142 S. Ct. 211, 2126). The government bears the burden of proof. Bruen at 17, 142 S. Ct. at 2126.
The Supreme Court reiterated in Rahimi that “the appropriate analysis involves considering whether the challenged regulation is consistent with the principles that underpin our regulatory tradition.” 602 U.S. 680, 692, 144 S. Ct. 1889, 1898 (citing Bruen, 597 U.S. at 26–31, 142 S. Ct. at 2131–34). Courts must “ascertain whether the new law is ‘relevantly similar’ to laws that our tradition is understood to permit.” Id.
The Court then looks to historical regulations enacted at or near the passage of the Second Amendment. (Regulations only coming into law during reconstruction and later are shortly dismissed and given little consideration for the Government.) Of particular importance is the above Militia Act which not only required eighteen- to twenty-year-olds to serve, but also required them “to furnish their own weapons.” Reese, 20.
Against this 1792 law which clearly required ownership of arms by eighteen- to twenty-year-olds in general, the Government raises several very specific prohibitions: laws governing the possession of arms on college grounds by college students, obligations of parents to arm eighteen- to twenty-year-olds, and the ineligibility for persons under twenty-one to serve as Constables in the great state of South Carolina. What all these laws had in common is that i) the laws did not prevent the ownership of arms by eighteen to twenty years-olds, and ii) other aged groups were equally affected for differing reasons.
The Court, finding the Government’s arguments unpersuasive concludes that the Government does “not meet its burden to establish a historical tradition of firearm restrictions imposed on eighteen-to-twenty-year-old Americans.” Reese, 25.
What’s Next?
The Fifth Circuit is not the first Court to conclude that Second Amendment rights attach to eighteen-to-twenty-year-olds. In fact, this very question was answered the same way by the Northern District of West Virginia in Brown v. BATFE, No. 1:22-CV-80. That case is now in front of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals which heard arguments on January 30th, 2025.
Similar arguments were considered in: Lara v. Comm’r Pa. State Police, No. 21-1832 (3d Cir. Jan. 13, 2025) (invalidating carry restrictions only affecting eighteen- to twenty-year-olds); Firearms Policy Coalitions, Inc. Et. Al. v. Steven C. McCraw, et al., No. 4:21-CV-1245-P (District Court Northern District of Texas, 2022) (“The Court concludes Texas failed to produce sufficient historical analogs from the Founding Era and the Reconstruction Era to support its statutory prohibition [on eighteen-to-twenty-year-olds carrying firearms.]”);Kristin Worth et. al. v. John Harrington in his official capacity Commissioner of Minnesota Department of Public Safety et al., No. 21-CV-1348 (District Court District of Minnesota 2023) (“Minn. Stat. § 624.714, subd. 2(b)(2)’s requirement that a person must be at least 21 years of age to receive a permit to publicly carry a handgun violates the federal constitutional right of 18—20-year-olds to keep and bear arms.”); and Blake Beeler et al. v. Jeff Long, No. 3:21-CV-152, Joint Motion to Enter Agreed Order (District Court, Eastern District of Tennessee 2023) (“The Challenged Scheme regulating the possession and carrying of handguns that restricts individuals aged 18 years old to 20 years old from carrying handguns or obtaining permits to carry handguns on the basis of age alone violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.”).
“Eighteen [year-olds have rights] and I like it.” Alice Cooper, I’m Eighteen (Straight Warner Bros. 1970). 55 years later, eighteen is finally old enough.