A federal judge in Louisiana this week handed down an absurdly restrictive injunction in a case that stood to overturn a handgun purchase ban on adults aged 18 to 20. 

The case, Reese v. ATF, was brought against the government by the Firearms Policy Coalition, the Louisiana Shooting Association, the Second Amendment Foundation, and three private citizens, Joseph Granich, Emily Naquin, and Caleb Reese. The private citizens were adults under age 21 at the time the case was initially filed, in November 2020, who sought to legally purchase a handgun. 

In January, a unanimous three-judge panel of the New Orleans-based U.S. Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals in Reese held that the federal government’s longstanding handgun ban for adults aged 18 to 20 years old violates the Second Amendment. The Circuit Court then handed the case down to U.S. District Judge Robert Summerhays for a final ruling in accordance with its findings. 

Summerhays, in his two-page judgment on Monday, while finding the federal "21 and over" limit unconstitutional and a violation of the Second Amendment, only granted injunctive relief from it to the three individuals in the case-- who are likely over age 20 by this point-- and members of the pro-gun groups who were co-plaintiffs. The rub on the latter is that it only applies to members inside the Fifth Circuit's jurisdiction (Mississippi, Louisiana, and Texas), and was a member on the day the case was filed in November 2020. 

Finally, the Summerhays ordered the three pro-gun groups to provide a "verified list" of their members to the defendants in the case-- the ATF and the Justice Department-- within 21 days. 

The gun rights groups are ready to go back to the Fifth Circuit to both protect their members and work towards a decision more in line with that court's January decision. 

"The practical effect of this order is almost laughable if it wasn’t so frustrating and didn’t impact the Second Amendment rights of thousands of individuals," SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut told Guns.com via email. "What the court has done here is say that this law is unconstitutional, but in order for an 18-year-old to avoid having their constitutional rights trounced by it today, they must live in one of only three states in the nation and have been a member of SAF at age 13. And even then, they’re only covered if SAF discloses their membership to the government under duress. 

"We’re currently examining our options in relation to the relief granted and will vigorously defend our members’ right to free association and privacy of such," said Kraut.