Judge Reed O’Connor, a Chief United States District judge in the Fifth Circuit, has determined the ban on possession and carry of arms in common use in Post Offices and on property owned by the Post Office is an infringement on the rights protected by the Second Amendment. From the decision:
The Court determines that both 18 U.S.C. § 930(a) and 39 C.F.R. § 232.1(1) are inconsistent with the principles that underpin this Nation’s regulatory tradition. Thus, they are unconstitutional as-applied to carrying firearms inside a an ordinary post office or on post office property.
The decision was published on September 30, 2025, in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division. The case is Firearms Policy Coalition Inc, et al., v. Pamela Bondi. The Second Amendment Foundation and two Texas citizens, Gavin Pate and George Mandry, were also parties to the lawsuit against the Federal government as represented by Pamela Bondi, United States Attorney General (AG). The original lawsuit was brought against Merrick Garland when he was AG on June 18, 2024.
Both the regulatory ban on firearms or other weapons in Post Offices and the Statutory ban on weapons in federal government buildings are relatively recent. The first prohibition on firearms in government buildings occurred in 1964. The regulatory ban on weapons in Post Offices was put in place in 1972.
Judge O’Connor handed down a summary judgment, which is appropriate when the facts of the case are not disputed. The only dispute in this case is about the law. Because the plaintiffs did not specify whether the case was a facial challenge or an “as applied” challenge, Judge O’Connor decided to treat it as an “as applied” challenge. The remedy only applies to the plaintiffs carrying ordinary firearms in an ordinary post office.
The judgment is limited to Plaintiffs carrying firearms inside of an ordinary post office or the surrounding post office property, with the exception of post offices inside of restricted areas. Examples of such restricted areas include military bases or post offices located in federal buildings, which otherwise prohibit the carry of firearms. It appears that the Plaintiffs will be able to carry firearms in most post offices in the USA. Plaintiffs include all members of the Second Amendment Foundation and the Firearms Coalition, as well as the two individual Plaintiffs.
The judgement applies to both 39 C.F.R. § 232.1(1) and 18 U.S.C. § 930(a). 39 C.F.R. is a post office regulation. 18 U.S.C. § 930(a) is a United States statute.
This case only applies in the Fifth Circuit of the United States. The Fifth Circuit includes Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi. It is unknown if the USA will appeal the Fifth Circuit decision on the carry and possession of firearms in Post Offices.
In recent developments, the United States Department of Justice has refused to appeal a criminal case in Florida, challenging the ban on carrying firearms in Post Offices. Florida is in the Eleventh Circuit.
The Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit upheld the ban on firearms in Post Offices in 2015 in Bonidy v. USPS. The Bonidy case was decided 2-1 in 2015. The Bonidy decision happened before the Supreme Court admonished the inferior courts on how they treated Second Amendment jurisprudence, with the Bruen decision in 2022.
It is likely the Supreme Court will strike down the ban on firearms in Post Offices when it hears a case on the subject. There is no historical tradition of such a ban when the Bill of Rights was ratified in 1791 or during the period when the 14th Amendment was ratified on July 9th, 1868. The Supreme Court has limited resources. A challenge to the ban on firearms in Post Offices may not reach the Supreme Court for several years.
DOJ Is Still Making Anti-Gun Decisions & We Need To Let Trump Know ~ VIDEO
Woman With Concealed Carry License Fatally Shoots Violent Intruder on Chicago’s West Side ~ VIDEO
About Dean Weingarten:
Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.
So, lets see if I understand this judgement: a law that is ruled unconstitutional by a Federal judge is actually unconstitutional for only a specific group of persons? Silly me… I always thought our U.S. Constitution protects all legal citizens of this nation. “Sorry officer, you can’t arrest me for carrying in the USPS office because I’m a member of SAF.” I’ll bet that’ll play out well…
If a law is ruled unconstitutional it should immediately be stricken from the books so it can no longer be used against any legal and law-abiding U.S. citizen.
By the same logic, the Gun-Free School Zones Act of 1990 is also unconstitutional since it is only a recent law.
And more good court news just in: “WASHINGTON – The Supreme Court is taking up another gun rights dispute in a case that could lead to more handguns in public places. The court, which has made major expansions to gun rights in recent years, agreed on Oct. 3 to hear a Trump-backed challenge to gun restrictions in Hawaii that require a gun user obtain permission before venturing onto private property open to the public such as a business. Hawaii and four other states led by Democrats − California, New York, Maryland and New Jersey − imposed new rules after the court in… Read more »
I remember back from 2004 to 2013 most every time I went into a U.S. Post Office I saw someone carrying a firearm. Even many of the people behind the counter. That’s when I was a contractor in Iraq and Afghanistan. Funny thing about it was that they would still put up the official signs stating it is a federal offense to have a firearm in the Post Office. I asked one of the soldiers working there why they put up the signs even though most everyone was carrying. He said it was in the regulations that the signs had… Read more »
While I have contributed to most 2nd Amendment groups, it is unclear whether I am a member without having been assigned a member number as most of them do not give you a membership number. When you log on to their web site they generally do not ask you for your membership number. In spite of the above, I would logically assume that since it is constitutional for someone else to wear their weapon in the post office in the 5th district then it would be for me also. I need some stamps. I like the ones with American flags… Read more »
Give the Judge a beer!
Follow the constitution and we don’t have a problem.