Trump administration pushes Supreme Court to strike down host of gun restrictions

The Trump administration is going full throttle to defend Americans’ Second Amendment rights against what officials see as overreaching gun control laws.

The administration is urging the U.S. Supreme Court to dismantle state and federal firearm restrictions, from laws blocking handguns on private property in states like Hawaii and California to federal age limits for ownership, while also backing challenges to assault-style weapon bans, as USA Today reports.

Let’s rewind to 2022, when the Supreme Court made it tougher for states to limit who can carry firearms in public. That landmark ruling threw a wrench into restrictive policies, striking down a New York law that demanded “proper cause” for carrying a handgun. It set a new standard: gun laws must align with historical regulation, or they’re toast.

State laws under fire for alleged overreach

Fast forward, and five densely populated, Democrat-led states — Hawaii, California, New York, Maryland, and New Jersey — passed rules banning handguns on private property without explicit owner consent. The Trump administration isn’t having it, arguing these laws effectively gut the right to carry in public, as affirmed in 2022. Talk about a backdoor ban — turns out, property lines shouldn’t erase constitutional protections.

The government’s case, as articulated by Solicitor General John Sauer, is sharp: “Someone carrying a firearm for self-defense cannot run errands without fear of criminal sanctions.” That’s a zinger with teeth—how can you defend yourself if you’re a criminal just for stepping onto the wrong driveway?

Interestingly, appeals courts are split on this. One upheld Hawaii’s restriction, while another tossed out New York’s similar rule, creating a patchwork of legal confusion across the nation. This inconsistency practically begs for Supreme Court intervention, doesn’t it?

Federal age limits face scrutiny

Meanwhile, the Department of Justice under Trump has taken a bold stance by refusing to defend a federal law setting 21 as the minimum age to own a handgun. After the New Orleans-based 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled this restriction unconstitutional in January, citing the historical regulation test, the DOJ doubled down by opting not to appeal to the Supreme Court in July 2025.

Contrast that with the Richmond-based 4th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, which upheld the age limit in June 2025. U.S. Circuit Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson III argued, “From English common law to America’s founding and beyond, our regulatory tradition has permitted restrictions on the sale of firearms to individuals under the age of 21.” Nice history lesson, Judge, but the Trump DOJ seems to think the Constitution’s plain text trumps dusty precedents.

Four young adults, aged 18 to 20, are now appealing the 4th Circuit’s decision to the Supreme Court, and the DOJ hasn’t yet responded. This clash of rulings could force the justices to step in and settle whether young adults get the same Second Amendment rights as everyone else.

Trump’s personal pledge to gun owners

During a 2024 campaign stop in Pennsylvania, then-candidateDonald Trump made his stance crystal clear to thousands of National Rifle Association members, declaring, “No one will lay a finger on your firearms.” That’s not just a promise — it’s a rallying cry for gun owners who’ve felt under siege by progressive policies. If actions speak louder than words, Trump’s early moves in office back this up.

Shortly after taking the oath, Trump signed an executive order directing a sweeping review of Biden-era firearm policies and federal positions in gun litigation. This isn’t just housekeeping; it’s a signal that the administration intends to roll back what they view as unconstitutional overreach.

The DOJ is also shifting gears on other fronts, like no longer fully opposing a Missouri law — previously blocked by lower courts — that would penalize state police for enforcing federal gun restrictions. It’s a slow turn, but as Hannah Hill of the National Foundation for Gun Rights put it, “But you’re seeing a slow pivot of a massive ship back toward the Constitution.” Let’s hope the ship doesn’t hit an iceberg of judicial activism on the way.

Assault-style weapons ban in crosshairs

On the topic of assault-style weapons, the Supreme Court declined to hear a challenge to Maryland’s ban in June, but the DOJ isn’t backing down elsewhere. Days after that decision, they urged the Chicago-based 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals to strike down a similar Illinois law, calling it “flatly unconstitutional” for banning commonly used firearms. That’s a direct shot at laws many gun owners see as infringing on their core rights.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh hinted at future action, noting, “I expect [my colleagues] will address the AR-15 issue soon, in the next term or two.” If that’s not a teaser for gun rights advocates, I don’t know what is. The anticipation is building, and the stakes couldn’t be higher.

At the end of the day, the Trump administration’s push is a clear message: Second Amendment rights aren’t negotiable, no matter how many progressive lawmakers try to redraw the lines. Whether it’s state property laws, federal age limits, or weapon bans, the fight is on, and the Supreme Court may soon have to draw the final boundary. Let’s just say, ignoring history has consequences — and the Constitution isn’t a suggestion.