Published July 17, 2026 at 4:50 PM ET · Updated July 17, 2026 at 6:37 PM ET
DOJ drops its appeal of the postal gun ban, leaving a carry victory intact
1 independent outlets are covering this story. Verification: Watching — single-source — not yet independently corroborated. Patriot Watch links to original reporting; we don't republish it.
The Department of Justice withdrew its appeal of a court ruling that struck down the postal gun ban. The decision leaves a lower-court victory for gun carry advocates intact.
Patriot Watch first flagged this story 3 hr ago, when AmmoLand reported it. So far this remains a single-source report. The most recent report came 3 hr ago from AmmoLand. Verification tier: Watching — single-source — not yet independently corroborated.
⚖ The Constitutional Angle
Heller recognized an individual Second Amendment right and noted that longstanding bans on carrying in sensitive places remain presumptively lawful. Bruen held that firearms regulations must be justified by consistency with the Nation's historical tradition. The postal ban survives only if the government can show such a tradition, and with the appeal withdrawn the ruling against it stands.
District of Columbia v. Heller 554 U.S. 570 (2008)
Vote: 5-4 · Opinion: Scalia
The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia and to use it for traditionally lawful purposes such as self-defense within the home. The right is not unlimited: the Court noted that longstanding prohibitions (e.g., possession by felons and the mentally ill, carrying in sensitive places, conditions on commercial sale) remain presumptively lawful. D.C.'s ban on handgun possession in the home and its requirement that lawful firearms in the home be kept nonfunctional violate the Second Amendment.
New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Kevin P. Bruen, Superintendent of New York State Police 597 U.S. 1 (2022)
Vote: 6-3 · Opinion: Thomas
New York's requirement that applicants demonstrate 'proper cause' — a special need for self-protection distinguishable from the general community — to obtain an unrestricted public-carry license violates the Fourteenth Amendment by preventing law-abiding citizens with ordinary self-defense needs from exercising their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms in public. The Court held the Second Amendment protects a right to carry handguns publicly for self-defense, and rejected the two-step means-end framework lower courts had applied after Heller.
Precedent facts from the PW Law Library — primary-source verified & independently audited
