The Fifth Circuit cleared the decks to reconsider the federal lifetime felon gun ban, putting a major Second Amendment fight on a fast track in the South.
Story Snapshot
- The Fifth Circuit vacated a panel ruling and ordered full-court rehearing in Squire on July 20.
- Judges will examine whether Congress even has Commerce Clause power to impose the felon-in-possession ban.
- The court also granted en banc review in Cordova, a direct Second Amendment challenge to the same statute.
- These moves signal real scrutiny of a lifetime ban that has rarely faced deep historical testing.
Fifth Circuit Wipes Panel Ruling And Goes En Banc In Squire
On July 20, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated a June 2 panel opinion and granted en banc rehearing in United States v. Squire. The order set new briefing and oral argument before the full court. The move centers on whether the felon-in-possession law, 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1), fits within Congress’s power under the Commerce Clause. The court’s order is short but decisive, and it clears prior reasoning from the field.
The en banc review focuses attention on the law’s interstate commerce “hook,” long used to defend many federal gun rules. Critics argue that reading the Commerce Clause this broadly lets Washington police any purely local gun possession. Supporters say the statute targets firearms that moved in or affected commerce. The court will now test those claims under current doctrine. The full-court rehearing shows the issue has grown beyond a routine, rubber-stamp question.
Second Amendment Challenge In Cordova Also Heads To Full Court
On September 14, the Fifth Circuit granted en banc review in United States v. Cordova. That case presses a direct Second Amendment attack on the same lifetime felon gun ban. Reporting on the grant marks it as a clean vehicle to weigh whether the Constitution allows a permanent, status-based disarmament for every felony, including nonviolent ones. The grant suggests judges want a full record and argument before setting a rule that would guide district courts across the circuit.
Cordova matters because recent Supreme Court rulings require the government to prove modern gun limits match this nation’s historical tradition. That test raises a basic question: Did the Founding generation adopt blanket lifetime bans for all felons, or did lawmakers target dangerous persons in narrower ways? Many lower courts have avoided answering that squarely. The en banc hearing gives the Fifth Circuit a chance to set clear, history-grounded guidance for citizens and law enforcement.
What These Twin Cases Could Change For Gun Owners
Squire could narrow Washington’s reach by holding that Congress cannot use the Commerce Clause to criminalize simple local possession when the person is not moving guns across state lines. A limit like that would send many cases back to states, where voters and local lawmakers hold the power. Cordova could reshape who may be disarmed and for how long, by forcing the government to show a strong historical match before it strips a core right for life. Together they could restore constitutional guardrails long ignored.
The Fifth Circuit is taking a case en banc that upheld a conviction under the felon gun ban for someone who did not serve any time in prison for the underlying offense.
Judge Oldham concurred in the panel opinion while saying the circuit's 922(g)(1) precedent "was wrong on the… pic.twitter.com/jrT8vLZBla
— Firearms Policy Coalition (@gunpolicy) September 14, 2026
Conservative readers should track two facts. First, the Fifth Circuit has not struck down the statute. The court only set both cases for full-court review. Second, a careful ruling could protect public safety and rights at the same time. Judges can affirm bans for truly dangerous offenders, while rejecting a one-size-fits-all rule that disarms people for life over nonviolent conduct. En banc review means the court is taking that line-drawing duty seriously, with real history and text on the table.
How We Got Here: From Routine Convictions To Real Scrutiny
For years, federal courts treated the felon-in-possession law as settled. After the Supreme Court’s recent text-and-history standard, that changed. Litigants began asking courts to point to close historical matches, not loose analogies. The Fifth Circuit’s orders in Squire and Cordova show that challenge is now front and center. Judges will weigh the historical record, the scope of federal power, and the balance between safety and liberty that our Constitution demands.
Bottom Line For Families, Hunters, And The Law-Abiding
Families want safe streets and a government that respects limits. These cases test both goals. If the court reins in the Commerce Clause, local communities regain say over local crimes. If the court rejects blanket lifetime bans, citizens who made mistakes but pose no threat may regain a core right after paying their debt. Either way, the Constitution, not bureaucracy, sets the rules. That is how a free people keep both order and liberty intact.
Sources:
reason.com, inkl.com, bearingarms.com, thegunmag.com
