A federal judge in Connecticut has upheld the state’s sweeping ban that blocks adults aged 18 to 20 from possessing, carrying, or purchasing firearms — a ruling gun‑rights advocates say directly contradicts the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision.
U.S. District Court Judge Sarala V. Nagala issued a 76‑page opinion defending the law, claiming her analysis is “consistent with Bruen.” Gun‑rights groups strongly disagree, arguing that Nagala relied on thin or irrelevant historical analogues that fail the Supreme Court’s test.
Two Connecticut residents, the Second Amendment Foundation, and the Connecticut Citizens Defense League filed the lawsuit in 2025, asserting that the Second Amendment applies fully to 18–20‑year‑old adults. They also argued the ban violates the 14th Amendment’s Equal Protection Clause, treating legal adults as second‑class citizens.
Gun‑rights advocates say the ruling highlights a growing problem: judges searching for any historical law, no matter how obscure, outdated, or from a jurisdiction hostile to gun ownership, to justify modern restrictions. Even if a state once enacted a similar ban, they argue, the Constitution’s command that the right to keep and bear arms “shall not be infringed” leaves no room for age‑based prohibitions on lawful adults.
The Second Amendment Foundation says it will appeal to the Second Circuit Court of Appeals, setting up another major fight over how far states can go in restricting gun rights for young adults.
Leave a Reply