Hangun laying on a Gun / Firearms/Guns License Certificate Courtesy: Shutterstock-Photo by steved_np3
A federal appeals court debated the validity of a Florida law that prohibits those under the age of 21 from purchasing rifles and other long guns on Tuesday, amid changing views on how firearms can be limited.
The age restriction was part of a comprehensive school safety policy that was passed by Florida lawmakers and then-Governor Rick Scott soon after Nikolas Cruz, then 19 years old, killed 17 students and faculty members at Parkland’s Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in 2018 with a semiautomatic rifle. Handgun purchases by those under 21 were already prohibited by federal law.
Chief U.S. District Mark Walker maintained the age restriction despite the National Rifle Association’s lawsuit to the state statute. The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals’ three-judge panel affirmed the statute as well, but the NRA requested that the full appeals court take the matter into consideration.
Judges debated how to apply a number of gun rights decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court to the Florida statute during what is known as a “en banc” hearing in Atlanta on Tuesday.
The Supreme Court supported prohibiting the possession of firearms by those covered by domestic violence restraining orders in a June ruling in the case known as United States v. Rahimi. Both parties submitted a number of documents discussing how the Rahimi finding applies—or does not apply—to the age restriction after the 11th Circuit placed the Florida case on hold until the ruling was made.
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, a significant Supreme Court decision from 2022, stated that gun restrictions must be “consistent with this nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation.”
The age limit
The nation’s history of gun control was one of the main topics of discussion Tuesday.
The age requirement “was not a tradition known… at the time the Second Amendment was first adopted” in the 18th century, according to NRA attorney John Parker Sweeney, who argued it is illegal.
One of the court members who questioned Sweeney on the minimum age to purchase firearms was Judge Robin Rosenbaum.
“This is the issue with that. According to Rosenbaum, the issue is that the common law at the time denied anyone under 21 any rights, including the practical ability to buy a firearm. He also noted that most people under 21 worked on farms for their parents, lacked independent income, and were unable to sign contracts to buy firearms on credit.
Rosenbaum stated, “They couldn’t do a lot of things, they couldn’t sue.”
According to Rosenbaum, states at the time required parents to buy firearms for anyone under 21 who was a member of the military or militia.
“So how does that establish 18 as the number?” she inquired.
At the time, Sweeney stated, “Anyone with cash could go in” and buy a pistol, including those under the age of 21.
“I’m not denying that the common law imposed limitations that could impact the ability to purchase, but it’s not a prohibition on the purchase of firearms,” Sweeney stated.
The age restriction in Florida, according to Florida deputy attorney general Christopher Baum, “is consistent with the principles underlying this nation’s history and tradition of regulating firearms.”
However, other judges questioned the rationale for preventing 18-year-olds, who are considered adults, from owning firearms. Guns, including those given as presents, can be owned or used by anybody under the age of 21 in Florida.
The claim that the prohibition, quote, “ensures that parents continue to play a key role in supervising and facilitating 18- to 20-year-olds’ access to firearms” is one of the problems I have with it. Judge Barbara Lagoa, a former justice of the Florida Supreme Court, stated that the problem is that an 18-year-old in Florida, or elsewhere in the 50 states, is a legal adult and parents have no part or duty.
The “justification” for treating 18 to 20-year-olds at the time of the formation was that parents had a “duty” to care for youngsters under the age of 21, according to Judge Robert Luck, who continued the line of inquiry.
“Now, Florida has released 18 to 21-year-olds and declared, ‘You’re on your own, your parents have no obligation.'” There appears to be a discrepancy between the how and why of these older statutes and the how and why of Florida’s law, however, because Florida is attempting to treat them like juveniles only for the purpose of obtaining firearms,” said Luck, a former member of the Florida Supreme Court.
“Well, since the founding, the age of majority has differed for different activities,” Baum explained.
“How old do you have to be to purchase alcohol beverages in Florida?” William Pryor, the Chief Judge, inquired.
“Twenty-one, and also for tobacco,” said Baum.
“None of those are constitutional rights, correct?” Lagoa inquired.
Baum recognized that the age of majority was a “legislative decision” that might be altered. “That’s right, your honor,” he said.
The state’s arguments failed to convince Lagoa, who reiterated that “you can’t regulate a parent” in Florida.
“So what is the justification for saying, well for a 20 ½-year-old you have to ask your parents to buy a firearm but you don’t have to ask them to rent an apartment for you?” she inquired.
“The historical justification serves as the justification. The state’s attorney stated, “That’s how it was at the founding.”
Judges also argued about whether there were any laws allowing minors to purchase firearms at the time of the country’s founding.
“We’re talking about a very different legal regime, I mean, most law was the common law,” Pryor stated.
Other judges, however, argued that the laws in place at the time guaranteed children’ access to firearms and did not criminalize the purchase of firearms.
Over the decades, Sweeney acknowledged, things have changed.
“It’s clear from this discussion that the founding era was a different time from ours and while they didn’t trust minors with credit, they certainly trusted them with firearms,” Sweeney said.
According to Rosenbaum, “but they didn’t trust them with firearms” unless they were being watched.
“There is certainly historical evidence that shows there was a concern of our founding generation that individuals who were under the age of 21 would always be subject to the supervision of somebody else when they were in the military or the militia, or even with their parents, with firearms,” she said.
Stories that matter are our priority. At Florida Insider, we make sure that the information we provide our readers is accurate, easy-to-read, and informative. Whether you are interested in business, education, government, history, sports, real estate, nature or travel: we have something for everyone. Follow along for the best stories in the Sunshine State.
Mike has more than 30 years of experience in marketing and public relations. He once owned his own agency and has worked with some of the largest brands in the world.
