The Supreme Court declined to take up a case that would determine whether Americans between the ages of 18 and 20 can legally carry guns.
On April 21, justices declined to hear arguments in Worth v. Jacobson, allowing a lower appeals court ruling quashing the age restriction to stand.
The case centers on a Minnesota law barring anyone under the age of 21 from getting a handgun carry permit and legally carrying a gun in public.
With the backing of the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, Second Amendment Foundation, and Firearms Policy Coalition, Kristin Worth, Austin Dye, and Axel Anderson sued the state for infringement of their Constitutional rights in 2021.
In 2024, the case appeared before the St. Louis-based 8th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The appellate court ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, agreeing that the law violated the Second Amendment rights of 18, 19, and 20-year-olds.
“This is a resounding victory for 18-20-year-old adults who wish to exercise their constitutional right to bear arms,” Bryan Strawser, Chair of the Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, said in a statement.
Though the appellate court’s decision has been upheld, it doesn’t mean the fight is over. SAF is in the trenches with other states harboring similar laws on the books.
“We are cautiously optimistic the denial will have a positive impact in SAF’s challenges to similar bans in other states,” Second Amendment Foundation Founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb commented in a press release.
“Our goal is to remove any impediments for adults – no matter their age – to exercise their Second Amendment rights wherever they live.”
Though proponents of the Minnesota law said they were disappointed in the Court’s refusal to take up the case, they expressed hope that the age-limit issue would eventually be heard by the justices.
“I don’t think this is a final answer on age-limit cases from the Supreme Court,” Megan Walsh, director of the Gun Violence Prevention Law Clinic at the University of Minnesota, said.
“It doesn’t necessarily mean that a majority of justices think that the 8th Circuit approach was correct. I think it might just not be the right vehicle for questions that are going to have to be answered by the Supreme Court sooner rather than later.”
With the Supreme Court declining to hear the case, the appellate court’s decision to prevent enforcement of the Minnesota law stands.
1 Leave a Reply
What other version of the legal question to resolve the age limitation limit would be better than this? It is very disappointing that the SCOTUS is willing to let any fundamental right (the 2nd Amendment) be restricted in any way by so many illiberal states, while challenges to such restrictions take years to wend their way through various levels of appeal. Abuse of the fundamental Amendments to the Constitution should be addressed most expeditiously, with broad and clear clarifications that restrict any further challenges by authoritarian progresses overrunning these states.