The NRA challenges the machine gun possession ban via an amicus brief.
- M.R. Grigsby
- Aug 4, 2025
- 3 min read
By Michael R. Grigsby, | LCTI, LLC
Constitutional Challenge to Federal Machine Gun Prohibition: NRA Files Amicus Brief in Fifth Circuit Appeal
Somerset, Kentucky (LCTI)--- The National Rifle Association's Firearms Policy Coalition and Auction Foundation has submitted an amicus curiae brief to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, advocating for the affirmance of a district court ruling that declared federal machine gun possession prohibitions unconstitutional as applied to the defendant.
The underlying case involves defendant Justin Bryce Brown, who was prosecuted under federal statutes that criminalize private citizen possession of machine guns not registered before May 19, 1986. This regulatory framework effectively created a closed registry system, prohibiting civilian acquisition of automatic firearms manufactured after the specified cutoff date.
District Court Analysis and Constitutional Standard
The District Court Analysis and Constitutional Standard. The District Court rendered judgment in favor of the defendant, holding that the federal machine gun prohibition was unconstitutional as applied to Brown's circumstances. The court's analysis centered on the government's failure to satisfy its evidentiary burden under the constitutional standard established in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022).
Specifically, the district court determined that the government had not adequately demonstrated that the challenged regulation comports with "the Nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation," as mandated by the Supreme Court's Bruen framework.
The court characterized this evidentiary standard as imposing "a heavy burden" on the government, requiring substantial historical justification for firearms regulations that implicate Second Amendment rights.
NRA's Appellate Arguments
The NRA's amicus brief urges the Fifth Circuit to affirm the district court's constitutional holding. The organization's legal argument is structured around several key contentions:
1. Adherence to Bruen Methodology
The brief emphasizes that the Supreme Court's decision in NYSRPA v. Bruen—which the NRA characterizes as a "landmark victory"—established a definitive analytical framework for Second Amendment challenges. Under this precedent, courts must engage in rigorous historical analysis to determine whether firearms regulations align with the nation's historical tradition of firearm regulation.
2. Government's Burden of Proof
The NRA argues that regardless of the specific firearm regulation at issue, the government bears the constitutional burden of demonstrating historical consistency. The brief contends that this burden cannot be satisfied through contemporary policy justifications or utilitarian arguments but must be grounded in analogous historical regulations and traditions.
3. Insufficiency of Policy-Based Arguments
A central theme of the NRA's brief is the inadequacy of the government's reliance on policy considerations rather than historical precedent. The organization argues that the government's approach—focusing on public safety concerns and regulatory efficacy—fails to meet the constitutional standard established in Bruen, which requires historical grounding for firearms restrictions.
Legal Implications and Constitutional Analysis
The case presents significant implications for federal firearms regulation and Second Amendment jurisprudence. The challenge to machine gun prohibitions represents a direct application of the Bruen standard to longstanding federal restrictions that have previously withstood constitutional scrutiny under different analytical frameworks.
The NRA's position reflects a broader constitutional argument that post-*Bruen* Second Amendment analysis must be anchored in historical tradition rather than contemporary policy considerations. This interpretive approach potentially calls into question various federal firearms regulations that were previously upheld under intermediate scrutiny or other constitutional tests that the Supreme Court's current methodology has superseded.
Summation
The Fifth Circuit's ultimate disposition of this appeal will likely have substantial ramifications for federal firearms regulation and the scope of Second Amendment protections. The court must determine whether the district court correctly applied the Bruen standard and whether the government's historical evidence was sufficient to justify the machine gun possession prohibition under current constitutional analysis.
The case represents a significant test of how lower courts will implement the Supreme Court's Bruen framework when evaluating established federal firearms restrictions, particularly those involving automatic weapons that have been subject to comprehensive federal regulation since the 1930s.
*******
© 2025 Lake Cumberland Tactical Innovations LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Comments