The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled 2–1 that the historic federal ban on interstate handgun sales violates the Second Amendment, overturning restrictions that have governed purchases for six decades. Federal law allowed licensed dealers to sell rifles and shotguns directly to buyers in other states but required handgun purchases to go through a dealer in the buyer’s home state, adding fees and delays before the customer could take possession.

Texas gun dealer Elite Precision Customs filed the lawsuit with two out-of-state customers and the Firearms Policy Coalition. A district court dismissed their challenge, finding the rules were lawful commercial regulations. The appeals court reversed it and entered judgment for the plaintiffs.

Judge Jerry Smith wrote that the government failed to identify a founding-era tradition supporting the ban under the historical test the Supreme Court established in its 2022 Bruen decision. Judge Catharina Haynes dissented and supported the lower court’s conclusion. The ruling governs Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, though further appeals could delay or change its effect.

The decision applies the Supreme Court’s history-based Second Amendment test to firearm sales, not to possession or carrying, effectively expanding judicial scrutiny to regulations that determine where and how purchases may occur.

Congress adopted the restrictions in 1968 to prevent buyers from crossing state lines to evade gun laws. The Fifth Circuit found that the public-safety goal was insufficient because the government could not identify a founding-era parallel. That reasoning could invite challenges to other federal sales rules lacking close historical parallels.

What the ruling does not do is erase any state eligibility requirements or background checks, as buyers will still need to qualify under federal law. Licensed dealers will remain responsible for completing checks and records.

The ruling may not be the final word. The federal government could ask the full Fifth Circuit to reconsider the case or appeal to the Supreme Court, while other federal appeals courts could interpret the law differently, leaving handgun sales subject to conflicting regional rules until Congress or the Supreme Court establishes a national standard.

A wider interstate market could make uncommon models easier to find and deliver better prices. Someone near a state line could avoid paying a second dealer to complete a purchase. The ruling could also alter how gun shops operate, as dealers close to state borders would be able to attract new customers who no longer have to pay extra dealer fees.

A win for Second Amendment supporters, the ruling gives gun-rights groups a stronger basis to challenge future laws that block entire categories of lawful purchases or impose added costs on exercising the Second Amendment. The Fifth Circuit drew a clear distinction between background checks and restrictions that function as outright bans.

Such reasoning could influence future lawsuits over age limits, mandatory transfer fees and other barriers to buying firearms, although it binds courts only within the Fifth Circuit. Lawmakers can still regulate sales, but they may have to show that new rules protect public safety without denying lawful buyers a practical way to exercise the right itself.