On Tuesday, america Court docket of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reaffirmed the constitutionality of the federal prohibition on non-public possession of machine weapons, rejecting a direct problem to 18 U.S.C. § 922(o) in a case involving a capturing involving a handgun modified by a machine gun conversion machine (MCD).
In United States v. Jamaion Wilson, a unanimous panel led by Choose Don R. Willett affirmed Wilson’s conviction for illegal possession of a machine gun, holding that such weapons stay exterior the safety of the Second Modification. The court docket mentioned the choice reinforces longstanding circuit precedent and resists calls to rethink it in mild of evolving firearm expertise or the Supreme Court docket’s 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Affiliation v. Bruen.
Wilson pleaded responsible to violating § 922(o) after utilizing a handgun outfitted with a “Glock Change”. This small, unlawful machine gun conversion machine (MCD) converts a semiautomatic pistol into a totally automated machine gun. Mr. Wilson used his firearm to kill a vendor who allegedly offered him a faux firearm in a 2023 Texas fuel station parking zone confrontation. Prosecutors charged him with a machine gun possession offense, which carries a most 10-year sentence.
Dwell Stock Value Checker
On attraction, Wilson argued that the near-total ban on machine weapons enacted in 1986 by way of the Hughes Modification violates the Second Modification, significantly post-Bruen. He claimed that fashionable proliferation of conversion gadgets has made machine weapons “frequent” right now.
The Fifth Circuit disagreed, relying closely on its 2016 determination in Hollis v. Lynch, which held that machine weapons are “harmful and weird” weapons not in “frequent use” for lawful functions and thus unprotected. Underneath the circuit’s rule of orderliness, panels are sure by prior selections until overruled en banc or by the Supreme Court docket.
Wilson tried to bypass Hollis by citing up to date ATF statistics exhibiting a whole bunch of hundreds, or probably hundreds of thousands, of machine weapons in circulation when together with unlawful gadgets. The court docket dismissed this as irrelevant, noting that solely lawfully possessed firearms rely towards “frequent use” for self-defense, the core goal protected by the Second Modification.
Citing the latest Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) knowledge from June 2025, the panel identified that whereas 740,000 machine weapons are registered within the Nationwide Firearms Registration and Switch File, the overwhelming majority are owned by authorities entities, legislation enforcement, or sellers for official functions comparable to promoting to the federal government. Critically, solely roughly 234,718 are transferable to non-public civilians, a determine, in keeping with the court docket, is similar to the 175,000 cited by Hollis practically a decade in the past.
“Firearms held by police and army entities are irrelevant to the ‘frequent use’ inquiry,” the opinion said, emphasizing that non-public, lawful possession for self-defense stays terribly uncommon.
The court docket additionally rejected the argument that Bruen—which requires gun rules to align with historic custom—implicitly overruled Hollis. Nothing in Bruen unequivocally disturbed Hollis‘s conclusion, anchored in District of Columbia v. Heller‘s description of machine weapons just like the M-16 as quintessential “harmful and weird” arms.
The Fifth Circuit confused that unlawful proliferation doesn’t render machine weapons “frequent” underneath the Second Modification. Solely widespread, lawful use by law-abiding residents for reputable functions qualifies.
Gun rights advocates view the choice as one other decrease court docket resisting Bruen‘s full implications, whereas supporters of restrictions hail it as preserving a crucial restrict on machine weapons. The opinion solidifies the machine gun ban in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, the place the Fifth Circuit holds sway.
Except reheard en banc or taken up by the Supreme Court docket, non-public civilians stay barred from possessing new machine weapons or conversion gadgets made after 1986. They might withstand 10 years in federal jail for violations.
Wilson, who acquired the statutory most sentence, noticed his conviction and 120-month time period affirmed in full.
DOJ Declares Federal Ban on Mailing Handguns Unconstitutional in Landmark Opinion
About John Crump
Mr. Crump is an NRA teacher and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed folks from all walks of life, and on the Structure. John lives in Northern Virginia along with his spouse and sons, comply with him on X at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.
