On Oct. 25, 2021, Kramer Levin filed an amicus brief in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on behalf of its client Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund in National Rifle Association v. Swearingen. Everytown is the nation’s largest gun-violence-prevention organization in the country, with nearly 6 million supporters across the nation fighting for public safety measures that respect the Second Amendment and help save lives. In Swearingen, the NRA appeals the District Court’s dismissal of its claim that Florida Statute § 790.065(13), also known as the Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School Act, violates the Second and Fourteenth Amendments. The Act, enacted by the Florida legislature following the 2018 mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida by a 19-year-old gunman who killed 17 people (including 14 children) and wounded 17 more, restricts the purchase of firearms for persons under the age of 21.

Our brief supports the position of the Commissioner of the Florida Department of Law Enforcement, who defends the statute. Our brief provides the Swearingen court with a legal and historical analysis of age-based firearms restrictions. First, we argue that Florida’s age-based restriction does not burden Second Amendment conduct as historically understood because persons under the age of 21 were considered minors at the time of the ratification of the Fourteenth Amendment. Second, we review the long history subsequent to that period of restrictions on the purchase and transfer of firearms to minors, which courts have upheld for at least 150 years. Third, we address the NRA’s arguments, which ignore the 150-year history of age-based firearms restrictions and rely on inapplicable militia laws from the 18th Century.

The NRA’s lawsuit is one of several similar lawsuits recently filed in federal and state courts across the country arguing against the constitutionality of age-based firearms restrictions. Kramer Levin has recently filed amicus briefs on behalf of Everytown in the Fourth and Ninth Circuit Courts of Appeals in support of the constitutionality of similar laws.

The brief is available here .

Related Practices