Important Highlights
- The Trump DOJ is contesting state statutes that prohibit individuals from bringing firearms onto private property without permission.
- The DOJ won’t defend federal age limits, allowing 18- to 20-year-olds more access to handguns.
- Gun rights policy is shifting fast, with the Trump administration reviewing and rolling back Biden-era restrictions.
Trump DOJ Targets State Property Gun Restrictions
The Trump DOJ is taking aggressive action against new gun restrictions in five Democratic led states Hawaii, California, New York, Maryland, and New Jersey.
These laws make it illegal to bring a handgun onto someone else’s property without their express permission.
But the DOJ argues these rules go too far and directly conflict with the Second Amendment.
In a legal briefly presented to the Supreme Court, Solicitor General John Sawyer said that the federal government has “adequate interest” in ensuring that the right to tolerate weapons of Americans is not blocked by more comprehensive state laws.
He said that these restrictions were passed after a major Supreme Court verdict in 2022, “effectively” publicly reduces authority, which retains the decision.
Simply put, Trump DOJ believes that the Constitution publicly protects your right to carry a gun and this right is not just because you step on private property.
Trump DOJ Refuses to Defend Age-Based Handgun Ban
The DOJ is also shifting its stance on federal laws that restrict handgun purchases by young adults.
A long-standing legislation forbade those between the ages of 18 and 20 from purchasing guns.
However, early this year, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that prohibition was unconstitutional due to its lack of historical backing.
Rather than challenge that decision, the Trump DOJ let it stand effectively walking away from defending the law.
However, not every court agrees. The 4th Circuit ruled the opposite, saying age restrictions do have a long history in American law.
Because two major courts now disagree, the Supreme Court may end up weighing in again. Still, the DOJ hasn’t filed a response in the 4th Circuit case, leaving its next move unclear.
This refusal to appeal signals a larger change in federal policy and shows the administration is serious about backing up its gun rights promises.
Trump DOJ Reverses Course on Gun Policy Nationwide
Beyond individual court cases, the Trump DOJ is making broader changes to how the federal government approaches firearms policy.
One major example: the DOJ no longer opposes parts of a Missouri law that penalizes police for enforcing federal gun laws.
That law had been challenged during the Biden administration but is now being reconsidered.
Additionally, Trump issued an executive order shortly after taking office that ordered a full review of Biden era gun policies and legal strategies.
Even more controversial is the issue of “ghost guns” homemade, untraceable firearms.
The Supreme Court upheld a rule to regulate them earlier this year, but many gun rights groups are pushing the administration to roll back that regulation too.
Hannah Hill, vice president of the National Foundation for Gun Rights, said she’s encouraged by the DOJ’s direction.
“You’re seeing a slow pivot of a massive ship back toward the Constitution,” she said. “And I’m extremely encouraged by the trajectory.”
Trump’s Promises Are Driving DOJ Action
So why is all of this happening? Much of it ties back to Trump’s 2024 campaign promises.
At an NRA rally in Pennsylvania, Trump told a cheering crowd, “No one will lay a finger on your firearms.”
Since returning to office, he’s worked to make good on that pledge.
His administration has made it clear: the federal government is now aligned with expanding gun rights, not restricting them.
By using a new legal test laid out by the Supreme Court in 2022 which says gun laws must be rooted in American history the Trump DOJ is laying the groundwork to challenge modern restrictions that don’t pass that test.
While some legal fights are just beginning, the direction is clear. The DOJ is no longer playing defense when it comes to the Second Amendment.
