A U.S. District Judge has ruled that a federal law prohibiting individuals from carrying firearms in post offices is unconstitutional.
The ruling came as part of the dismissal of a charge against postal worker Emmanuel Ayala, a U.S. Postal Service truck driver, accused of illegally possessing a firearm in a federal facility. According to his lawyers, Ayala had a concealed weapons permit and would carry a 9mm handgun in a fanny pack for self-defense.
U.S. District Judge Kathryn Kimball Mizelle dismissed Ayala’s charge of illegally possessing a gun in a federal building, declaring that that such charges violated Ayala’s Second Amendment rights.
“Possessing a firearm in a Federal facility is an activity that falls within the plain text
of the Second Amendment,” Mizelle stated.
The judge also referenced the recent Supreme Court ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, which established a new standard for gun regulation. This standard asserts that gun restrictions must align with the “history and tradition” of firearm regulation in the United States.
“A blanket restriction on firearms possession in post offices is incongruent with the American tradition of firearms regulation,” the judge decided in her opinion.
Mizelle pointed out the fact that post offices have been an integral part of the nation since its founding, and firearm restrictions were not imposed in these facilities for most of our country’s history. It wasn’t until 1964 that individuals were barred from carrying firearms in government buildings, and 1972 when this restriction applied to post offices.
The judge argued that restricting individuals from carrying firearms in government buildings would essentially “abridge the right to bear arms by regulating it into practical non-existence.” Mizelle also concluded that it is unclear why restricting firerams in government buildings, rather than private buildings, would uniquely promote public safety.
