Colorado Court Decision To Uphold Gun Sales Ban For Citizens Under 21 Sparks Constitutional Debate

In a controversial decision, the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals has upheld Colorado’s law banning gun sales to adults under 21, a move that has prompted questions about the scope of Second Amendment protections. The law, introduced as Senate Bill 23-169 and signed by Gov. Jared Polis in 2023, prohibits firearm sales to individuals aged 18 to 20. Although a lower court initially blocked the law, citing constitutional concerns, the appeals court reversed that decision.

The ruling, written by U.S. Circuit Judge Richard Federico, maintains that Colorado’s age restriction does not infringe on the Second Amendment because it regulates commercial gun sales without denying the right to bear arms. Federico pointed to Supreme Court rulings that permit certain conditions on firearm transactions, stating that age restrictions are “presumptively lawful” when intended to enhance public safety.

Supporters argue that restricting gun access for young adults will reduce risks associated with impulsive behavior, citing studies suggesting that individuals under 21 may lack mature impulse control. Proponents say that this measure aligns with historical approaches to firearm regulation, as age-based restrictions are not unprecedented.

Gun rights advocates, including the Rocky Mountain Gun Owners (RMGO), argue that the law denies young adults the fundamental right to purchase firearms for lawful purposes like self-defense. RMGO asserts that the Second Amendment’s protections should not be subject to age-based discrimination and that adults aged 18 and older should be entitled to exercise their rights.

Opponents further criticize the law’s inconsistency with other adult privileges, such as voting, military enlistment, and tax obligations. They argue that 18-year-olds should be considered fully responsible adults with access to all constitutional rights, including the right to bear arms.

RMGO has stated its intent to appeal, with plans to challenge the ruling in the Supreme Court if necessary. The outcome of this case could have far-reaching implications for age-based firearm regulations, setting the stage for an important decision on the future of Second Amendment rights.