Trump DOJ Doubles Down on Claim it Can Ban All Knives [Member Exclusive]

“Can the federal government ban all knives?” Decide Cory Wilson requested.

“I feel it could nicely not be a Second Modification downside to ban knives,” Sean Janda, a Division of Justice (DOJ) lawyer, replied. 

That was an trade throughout Wednesday’s oral arguments in Knife Rights Inc. v. Bondi. That case is a constitutional problem to the Federal Switchblade Act (FSA). Plaintiffs need to get the legislation declared unconstitutional, however the DOJ is defending it on all factors.

The trade represents a doubling down on the Trump Administration’s declare to sweeping authority to control knives. Whereas President Trump has directed the chief department to remodel coverage towards an expansive view of the Second Modification and gun-rights activists have cheered various the administration’s gun initiatives, the DOJ has continued to say expansive authority to control some weapons and, particularly, knives. That’s put the DOJ within the odd place of claiming AR-15s can’t be banned below the Second Modification, however pocket knives can.

Although DOJ stated it reserves the proper to prosecute anybody for violating the FSA, which bans possession or sale of switchblades and different computerized knives in sure locations, it didn’t endorse the concept of really banning all knives. It claimed the federal government doing so wouldn’t violate the Second Modification, however stated it isn’t essentially a good suggestion regardless.

“It might be a foolish legislation, for lots of different causes,” Janda stated of a complete ban on all knives.

“How may it not be a Second Modification downside to ban all knives?” Fifth Circuit Chief Decide Jennifer Walker Elrod interrupted in a shocked tone.

Janda solidified DOJ’s place on the purpose–although he stated banning swords can be an issue.

“I feel we’ve this very clear historic custom, together with all kinds of knives, small–not swords, which I feel are protected–however form of dirks, daggers, Bowie knives,” Janda stated.

The excellence between knives and swords within the DOJ’s thoughts appears to stem from its declare that concealability is the figuring out consider whether or not the federal government can regulate, and even ban, an arm. Janda defined the DOJ’s view in his opening remarks.

“First, we’ve the very well-grounded historic precept that states authorities might regulate hid and due to this fact inherently concealable weapons like the automated switchblades at situation on this case,” he advised the judges. “Second is the equally well-grounded precept that the Second Modification doesn’t prolong to weapons which are tailored for prison misuse. After which third is the precept that I feel miles restrictions, equivalent to these on the style and mode of operation of weapons, don’t mirror the infringement of the Second Modification proper.”

The panel appeared extremely skeptical of that formulation, although. One of many judges requested whether or not the federal government was attempting to argue computerized knives aren’t protected by the textual content of the Second Modification below the Bruen take a look at or whether or not it was attempting to argue they’re protected, however there’s a historic custom of banning them. When the federal government responded that it didn’t assume the excellence mattered, the decide adopted up by saying he thought it very a lot did matter.

That additionally led to a number of questions concerning the historic assist for the federal government’s argument. The DOJ declined to take a agency place on whether or not legal guidelines from the mid-to-late nineteenth Century ought to carry the identical weight in a Bruen evaluation as these from the Founding. Gardner was additionally unable to determine state legal guidelines that banned the possession of computerized knives from the Founding Period.

Past the deserves, the place the judges appear constantly skeptical of the federal government’s broad claims of authority, the panel additionally requested a number of instances whether or not they should remand the case again all the way down to the decrease courtroom to rethink the deserves. One decide additionally requested whether or not ruling towards the federal government would create a circuit cut up with the Ninth Circuit, which not too long ago upheld a state knife carry ban. However they appeared glad that it wouldn’t, because the legislation at situation on this case is federal.

General, whereas the Fifth Circuit panel expressed some considerations over the scope of the plaintiffs’ problem and their standing to deliver the case, the three judges have been downright hostile towards the federal government’s expansive studying of its authority to control–and even outright ban–knives below the Second Modification. Nonetheless, oral arguments aren’t at all times predictive of the place judges will come down in an precise opinion. So, the general public should watch for the panel’s last resolution earlier than it finds out whether or not the federal authorities actually has the ability to ban all knives–at the very least, in concept.

UPDATE 4-3-2026 5:29 PM EASTERN: This piece has been up to date to right DOJ lawyer Sean Janda’s title. We apologize for the error.