Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

APPEARS IN News

U.S. District Court Judge: Post Office Gun Ban Unconstitutional

Monday, January 22, 2024

U.S. District Court Judge: Post Office Gun Ban Unconstitutional

Late last week brought some welcome movement on an issue that has plagued gun owners for decades. On January 19, U.S. District Court Judge for the Middle District of Florida Kathryn Kimball Mizelle ruled in U.S. v. Ayala that the federal prohibition on firearms in U.S. Post Offices is unconstitutional. The ruling has the potential to significantly impact those who exercise their Right-to-Carry, as for many Americans, a post office may be their chief or only physical interaction with the federal leviathan.

Federal law, 18 U.S.C. § 930, creates a blanket firearm prohibition for “federal facilities.” Those found guilty of possessing a firearm at a “federal facility” face up to a year in prison. Moreover, U.S. Postal Service regulations, 39 C.F.R. § 232.1, provide,

Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, rule or regulation, no person while on postal property may carry firearms, other dangerous or deadly weapons, or explosives, either openly or concealed, or store the same on postal property, except for official purposes.

This Postal Service gun ban has been interpreted broadly, with ridiculous results. In U.S. v. Dorosan (2009), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit upheld the conviction of a man who had a firearm in the glove box of a private vehicle in a post office parking lot.

In another case, Bonidy v. U.S. Postal Service (2015), the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit ruled that a rural Colorado man couldn’t store his lawfully carried firearm in his vehicle in the post office parking lot while picking up his mail, even though his post office did not deliver mail to residences. In justifying the gun ban, the Court opined,

the parking lot should be considered as a single unit with the postal building itself to which it is attached and which it exclusively serves. There is, in fact, a drop-off box for the post office in the parking lot, meaning that postal transactions take place in the parking lot as well as in the building.

This logic may cause a person to question whether some believe the U.S. Postal Service could commandeer any location with a collection box, or for that matter the end of your driveway.

That was all before the U.S. Supreme Court’s ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022). The opinion stated that law-abiding Americans have a right to carry outside the home for self-defense, and in doing so made clear that the government does not have unfettered authority to label locations as “sensitive” to prohibit carry.

The Bruen decision noted,

[w]hen the Second Amendment’s plain text covers an individual’s conduct, the Constitution presumptively protects that conduct. The government must then justify its regulation by demonstrating that it is consistent with the Nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation. Only then may a court conclude that the individual’s conduct falls outside the Second Amendment’s “unqualified command.”

Citing Bruen, Judge Mizelle explained,

New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022), requires the United States to present historical support for § 930(a)’s application to Ayala, which it fails to do. Post offices have existed since the founding, as have threats to the safety of postal workers and the public entering those locations. Yet the historical record yields no “distinctly similar historical regulation addressing” those safety problems by regulating firearms in post offices.

Judge Mizelle went on to note, that while the Supreme Court’s District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), McDonald v. Chicago (2010), and Bruen decisions contemplated some specific “sensitive places,” none of these rulings contend that firearms may be prohibited in all manner of government buildings. The Judge stated that in its discussion of “sensitive places,”

The Supreme Court was providing an example of how the Bruen test works in practice. It had earlier explained that largely unchallenged founding-era regulations will almost certainly be constitutional. It then provided three examples—legislative assemblies, polling places, and courthouses. The paragraph proceeds to direct lower courts to use these three places as analogues when deciding how the sensitive-places exception applies to modern regulations.

Post offices are clearly not analogous to these enumerated locations.

Despite the ruling, gun owners would be wise to hold off on carrying at the post office just yet. On January 18, the U.S. Postal Service put out a news item stating that their no firearms policy is still in force.

Still, Judge Mizelle’s ruling is an important step towards rectifying decades of injustice. Moreover, the ruling bodes ill for other unjustifiable “federal facility” gun bans. After Bruen, no one should envy the government attorneys tasked with concocting arguments for how National Park commodes are “sensitive places.”

TRENDING NOW
California: Bill to Restrict Self Defense Rights Introduced in Legislature

Friday, February 28, 2025

California: Bill to Restrict Self Defense Rights Introduced in Legislature

The California legislative session is currently underway and anti-gun lawmakers are once again wrongly focusing on law-abiding citizens instead of focusing on actual criminals.

NRA Statement on President Trump’s Executive Order Protecting Second Amendment Rights

News  

Second Amendment  

Friday, February 7, 2025

NRA Statement on President Trump’s Executive Order Protecting Second Amendment Rights

Today, the White House announced a new Executive Order to protect and expand the Second Amendment rights of all law-abiding Americans. This is the first action taken by President Donald J. Trump to carry through ...

New York Town Bans Gun Stores

News  

Monday, March 3, 2025

New York Town Bans Gun Stores

For far too long, the Second Amendment could be referred to as the Rodney Dangerfield of the Bill of Rights.  Within many circles of so-called civil rights advocates, it simply got no respect.  

Report: Notorious NYPD License Division Drags its Feet on Bruen Compliance

News  

Monday, March 3, 2025

Report: Notorious NYPD License Division Drags its Feet on Bruen Compliance

Following its landmark loss at the U.S. Supreme Court in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022), which made clear law-abiding citizens have a right to bear arms outside the home for self-defense, New ...

CPRC: The Many Ways Concealed Carry Permitees Enhance Public Safety

News  

Monday, March 3, 2025

CPRC: The Many Ways Concealed Carry Permitees Enhance Public Safety

Amid the push for national concealed carry reciprocity legislation, gun control opponents continue to insist that concealed carrying has no public safety benefits and that lawfully armed civilians simply escalate the risk to first responders and others ...

NRA Files Amicus Brief Urging SCOTUS to Hear Challenge to New York’s “Concealed Carry Improvement Act”

Wednesday, February 26, 2025

NRA Files Amicus Brief Urging SCOTUS to Hear Challenge to New York’s “Concealed Carry Improvement Act”

Today, the National Rifle Association filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a challenge to New York’s “Concealed Carry Improvement Act.”

Maine: Progressive Lawmaker Believes There Are No Deer in Northern Maine.

News  

Wednesday, March 5, 2025

Maine: Progressive Lawmaker Believes There Are No Deer in Northern Maine.

This week, extreme anti-hunting lawmakers testified to restrict coyote hunting in Maine.

New Mexico: Semi-Auto Ban Hearing Continued to Wednesday

Tuesday, March 4, 2025

New Mexico: Semi-Auto Ban Hearing Continued to Wednesday

Yesterday evening, Senate Judiciary Committee introduced the language for SB 279, with many voices from the firearms industry, firearms dealers, sportsmen, cattle ranchers, and ordinary citizens made their opposition known in testimony.

The Hearing Protection Act Introduced in the 119th Congress

News  

Wednesday, February 5, 2025

The Hearing Protection Act Introduced in the 119th Congress

U.S. Representative Ben Cline (R-VA-06) and U.S. Senator Mike Crapo (R-ID) recently reintroduced the Hearing Protection Act (H.R. 404/S. 364) in the 119th Congress. This commonsense legislation will give gun owners and hunters the opportunity to ...

Colorado: FOID Bill Removed From Hearing Schedule A Second Time

Tuesday, March 4, 2025

Colorado: FOID Bill Removed From Hearing Schedule A Second Time

Following the trend of this legislative session, Colorado's semi-automatic ban turned FOID-bill has experienced yet another delay.

MORE TRENDING +
LESS TRENDING -

More Like This From Around The NRA

NRA ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.