Colorado’s 21-and-older gun law can go into effect, federal appeals court rules
The ruling from the 10th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals dissolves a temporary hold that a federal district court judge placed on the law in August 2023 . But the ruling doesn't end the legal challenge to the law. Instead, it sends the case back to the lower court for the much more detailed arguments that will ultimately decide whether the law can stand.
The law was challenged by Rocky Mountain Gun Owners, a gun-rights advocacy group, as well as two people who said the law blocked them from buying a firearm to protect themselves. One of those plaintiffs has since turned 21.
They argued that the law violates their Second Amendment rights. But the appeals court panel concluded that argument isn't clear-cut enough to be entitled to a temporary injunction against the law.
"The best reading is that (the law) is presumptively lawful because the aged-based condition or qualification on the conduct it proscribes falls outside the scope of the plain text of the Second Amendment," the judges found in their opinion.
In another section, the judges added: "It seems evident that the necessity of some minimum age requirement is widely accepted — after all, no one is reasonably arguing that 8-year-olds should be allowed to purchase guns."
The case involves a law passed in 2023 , Senate Bill 169 . The law changes the minimum age to purchase a firearm to 21 from 18 in Colorado. Supporters argue that the law is meant to reduce youth suicides, accidental shootings and gun violence.
Purchasers under the age of 21 as well as unlicensed firearm sellers could face a class-2 misdemeanor for violating the law. Licensed firearms dealers who break the law face a class 1 misdemeanor.
The law ultimately changes the status quo only when it comes to rifles and shotguns because federal law already bans the purchase of handguns by people under 21. The law does not ban the possession of guns by those under 21, nor does it prohibit people under 21 from acquiring firearms via gifts or inheritance. It also contains exemptions for military and law enforcement members.
Tuesday's ruling marks a relatively minor procedural step in the long arc of the case. But it also showcases how complicated and hotly contested federal firearm jurisprudence has become in the wake of Supreme Court decisions bolstering gun rights and requiring gun laws to be consistent with the nation's historical tradition of firearms regulation .
In August 2023, when Chief U.S. District Judge Philip A. Brimmer temporarily blocked the law in a 44-page order, he concluded "the individual plaintiffs have shown a likelihood of success on the merits." Finding such a likelihood is needed for a judge to issue an injunction.
In appealing that order, attorneys for the state filed over 1,000 pages of briefs and appendices, including four expert affidavits — three of them from historians and another from a neuroscientist. Eighteen states and the District of Columbia filed friend-of-the-court briefs in support of the Colorado law, while eight other organizations filed their own friend-of-the-court briefs arguing various positions.
The appeals court ruling, written by U.S. Circuit Judge Richard E.N. Federico, with the support of judges Carolyn Baldwin McHugh and Michael R. Murphy, stretches to 61 pages. A concurrence by McHugh — arguing that one particular issue should have been analyzed during the second step of a process laid out in a recent U.S. Supreme Court decision instead of during the first step — is another 30 pages. An appendix laying out the history of various state gun laws tacks on another seven pages.
All three judges on the 10th Circuit panel were appointed by Democratic presidents, while Brimmer was appointed by a Republican.
In the end, the appellate judges concluded that the legal issues in the case aren't as clear as Brimmer saw them.
"Laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the sale and purchase of arms do not implicate the plain text of the Second Amendment," Federico wrote in the ruling.
In a post on X , Rocky Mountain Gun Owners said the 10th Circuit judges "recharacterized this law into a mere commercial regulation instead of a constitutional right infringement."
"This is a very temporary setback, and we look forward to fighting back against this outrageous ruling," the organization wrote. "This law very clearly violates both the Second Amendment and the Supreme Court's precedents, and we look forward to ultimately striking it off the books."
