Judge Denies DOJ Request to Limit Injunction on Post Office Carry Ban

March 17, 2026
8:10 pm

▶

Listen to Article

In a resounding victory for Second Amendment advocates, a federal judge has shot down the Department of Justice's desperate bid to narrow an injunction blocking the U.S. Postal Service's longstanding ban on carrying firearms in post offices—but only for members of the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and Second Amendment Foundation (SAF). This ruling, handed down recently, keeps the protective order intact, ensuring that these groups' members can exercise their carry rights in these federal facilities without Big Brother's interference. It's not a nationwide win yet, but it's a critical foothold in dismantling what FPC rightly calls an unconstitutional relic from an era when post offices were treated like gun-free fortresses. Digging deeper, this stems from a 2023 lawsuit where FPC and SAF challenged 18 U.S.C. § 930(a), the federal law prohibiting firearms in Federal facilities like post offices—a provision that's been selectively enforced and riddled with exceptions that expose its arbitrary nature. The DOJ's request to limit the injunction was a classic bureaucratic feint, aiming to carve out wiggle room while appeals drag on, but Judge [relevant judge if named, else omit] wasn't buying it. This denial underscores a growing judicial skepticism toward post-New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022) gun bans: if the government can't justify historical analogues for restricting carry in mundane public spaces, these edicts crumble. Cleverly, the member-specific scope is a double-edged sword—it's narrow enough to survive scrutiny but plants seeds for broader challenges, pressuring the feds to either appeal or fold. For the 2A community, the implications are electric: this bolsters the post-Bruen momentum, where courts are increasingly striking down sensitive places bans lacking deep historical roots. Expect ripple effects—other groups could piggyback with similar suits, and a loss on appeal might force Congress to revisit § 930. It's a reminder that incremental wins compound; FPC and SAF members, keep carrying confidently at your local branch, and the rest of us, support these warriors to push this nationwide. The post office isn't a no-go zone—it's just the latest battleground reclaimed. Stay vigilant, patriots.

Best FFL Software Ranked and Compared!

In a resounding victory for Second Amendment advocates, a federal judge has shot down the Department of Justice’s desperate bid to narrow an injunction blocking the U.S. Postal Service’s longstanding ban on carrying firearms in post offices—but only for members of the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and Second Amendment Foundation (SAF). This ruling, handed down recently, keeps the protective order intact, ensuring that these groups’ members can exercise their carry rights in these federal facilities without Big Brother’s interference. It’s not a nationwide win yet, but it’s a critical foothold in dismantling what FPC rightly calls an unconstitutional relic from an era when post offices were treated like gun-free fortresses.

Digging deeper, this stems from a 2023 lawsuit where FPC and SAF challenged 18 U.S.C. § 930(a), the federal law prohibiting firearms in Federal facilities like post offices—a provision that’s been selectively enforced and riddled with exceptions that expose its arbitrary nature. The DOJ’s request to limit the injunction was a classic bureaucratic feint, aiming to carve out wiggle room while appeals drag on, but Judge [relevant judge if named, else omit] wasn’t buying it. This denial underscores a growing judicial skepticism toward post-New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen (2022) gun bans: if the government can’t justify historical analogues for restricting carry in mundane public spaces, these edicts crumble. Cleverly, the member-specific scope is a double-edged sword—it’s narrow enough to survive scrutiny but plants seeds for broader challenges, pressuring the feds to either appeal or fold.

For the 2A community, the implications are electric: this bolsters the post-Bruen momentum, where courts are increasingly striking down sensitive places bans lacking deep historical roots. Expect ripple effects—other groups could piggyback with similar suits, and a loss on appeal might force Congress to revisit § 930. It’s a reminder that incremental wins compound; FPC and SAF members, keep carrying confidently at your local branch, and the rest of us, support these warriors to push this nationwide. The post office isn’t a no-go zone—it’s just the latest battleground reclaimed. Stay vigilant, patriots.

Share this story