Quick summary: The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel issued a 15‑page opinion saying a 1927 ban on mailing concealable firearms is unconstitutional, backing a lawsuit by the Gun Owners of America. The memo, by T. Elliot Gaiser, argues handguns are at the core of the Second Amendment. The opinion comes alongside other DOJ moves critics say favor gun owners, including a new gun‑focused office, inspector cuts, approval of forced‑reset triggers, and cancelled violence‑prevention grants. The ultimate outcome will be decided by the courts.
Trump DOJ Declares Nearly 100-Year-Old Ban On Mailing Handguns Unconstitutional
The Department of Justice under former President Donald Trump has concluded that a 1927 federal law prohibiting the use of the U.S. Postal Service to send concealable firearms — including pistols and revolvers — is unconstitutional and unenforceable.
The conclusion appears in a 15-page opinion from the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC), authored by Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser. The memo states that handguns “fall within the core of the ‘arms’ protected by the Second Amendment,” and therefore restrictions on mailing them cannot be sustained.
What Prompted the Opinion
The legal opinion supports a courtroom challenge brought by the Gun Owners of America, a gun-rights group that argues the National Rifle Association is not aggressive enough on some constitutional issues. The OLC memo directly backs the group’s contention that the almost-century-old statute violates the Second Amendment; whether courts will accept that reading remains an open question.
Guns confiscated at New York City public schools at a news conference on May 25, 2022 in New York City.(Spencer Platt / Getty Images)
Policy Context and Related Moves
Observers say the OLC opinion fits a pattern of Justice Department actions that favor gun owners. Recent moves reported by the media include:
- Creation of a new DOJ office described as focusing on the interests of gun owners, announced by Attorney General Pam Bondi.
- Plans to reduce the number of federal inspectors who oversee licensed gun dealers by roughly two-thirds, which critics say would curb the government’s ability to identify dealers who illegally sell firearms.
- Federal approval to allow the sale of so-called "forced-reset" triggers, devices that can enable semiautomatic firearms to fire more rapidly; the administration characterized the move as enhancing public safety.
- Decisions to block or cancel grants — including a reported blocking of $1 billion in student mental-health grants proposed after the Uvalde elementary school shooting — and the cancellation of hundreds of other community grants, some of which funded gun-violence prevention programs.
How This Compares With Past Rhetoric
The stance contrasts with moments from Trump’s first term when, after deadly school shootings, he briefly supported proposals that included stronger interventions. For example, following a 2018 school massacre, he told lawmakers in a televised meeting, “Take the firearms first and then go to court,” a comment that signaled openness to aggressive removal measures paired with due process questions.
"Take the firearms first and then go to court." — Donald Trump, 2018
What Comes Next
The OLC opinion does not itself change the law; it is a legal interpretation meant to guide executive policy. The future of the 1927 ban will be decided in the courts as the Gun Owners of America’s challenge proceeds. Legal analysts expect the case to raise significant questions about the scope of the Second Amendment and the government’s authority to regulate how certain firearms are transferred.
Editor’s note: This article consolidates reporting about the OLC opinion and related Justice Department actions and will be updated as the court case and policy developments progress.
Help us improve.
