The Justice Department has declared a nearly century-old ban on mailing concealable firearms unconstitutional, clearing the way for handguns to be sent through the U.S. Postal Service while keeping some safety-related limits intact.

In a landmark move, the Department of Justice has struck down a nearly century-old federal law, opening the door to mailing handguns through the U.S. Postal Service. The department released a 15-page opinion this week that finds the 1927 statute banning the mailing of concealable firearms like pistols and revolvers unconstitutional under the Second Amendment. That opinion strips the government of the authority to enforce the handgun mailing ban while leaving other safety rules in place.

The ruling makes clear the ban on handguns cannot be enforced, but it preserves limits on various dangerous items such as undetectable firearms like pen guns and maintains postal safety rules against mailing ammunition or gunpowder. Those distinctions matter: the DOJ framed the change as restoring constitutional protections for ordinary citizens while still preventing truly hazardous items from moving through the mail. The opinion acknowledges safety concerns and does not turn the mail into a hazard zone.

This legal shift followed a lawsuit filed last July by a gun rights lobbying group challenging Postal Service policy and arguing Section 1715 is an anachronism rooted in Prohibition-era fears. Current Postal Service rules require nonmailable firearms found in the mail to be reported to the United States Postal Inspection Service, with cases referred to U.S. attorneys for prosecution. Private carriers such as UPS and FedEx still restrict firearm shipping to licensed dealers only, leaving many law-abiding people stuck without options.

The DOJ’s opinion goes further and identifies handguns as falling within the core of protected “arms,” putting the government on notice that routine administrative rules can’t quietly nullify constitutional rights. It argues mailing is often the most practical way to transport firearms, citing examples like a traveler unable to carry a gun on a bus from Washington, D.C., to Philadelphia. That practical reality has frustrated responsible gun owners for years, forcing them into awkward workarounds just to move property they legally own.

Assistant Attorney General T. Elliot Gaiser put the point plainly: “Section 1715 makes it difficult to travel with arms for lawful purposes, including self-defense, target shooting, and hunting,” said T. Elliot Gaiser, assistant attorney general for the Office of Legal Counsel. That quote captures the administration’s position: the law stood between citizens and basic, lawful activities. For many conservatives, the view is simple—laws should protect rights, not invent obstacles for people who follow the rules.

The opinion also grips the problem caused by private carriers’ policies. The DOJ highlights that UPS and FedEx limiting shipments only to licensed dealers has effectively left unlicensed citizens with no practical channel to send or receive handguns, calling the consequence a regulatory dead end. “Consequently, so long as Congress chooses to run a parcel service, the Second Amendment precludes it from refusing to ship constitutionally protected firearms to and from law-abiding citizens, even if they are not licensed manufacturers or dealers,” the DOJ opinion asserts. That sentence lands like a rebuke to both overbroad private rules and to public policies that create de facto bans.

This outcome doesn’t mean rules-free mail. The Justice Department kept in place prohibitions on undetectable weapons and sustained restrictions that protect postal workers and property from explosives and other dangerous goods. Those safety-driven lines are narrower than the old blanket ban on concealable firearms, and they show the decision aims to balance constitutional rights with real-world protections. Conservatives who argue for common-sense safeguards can accept measures that actually target danger rather than penalize lawful owners.

It’s worth noting the inconsistency in current practice: rifles and shotguns can move between licensed dealers, manufacturers, and importers under Postal Service policy with fewer hurdles, while handguns—widely used for personal protection—were treated differently for decades. Removing that unequal treatment aligns policy with how modern Americans actually use firearms and makes the law less arbitrary. Expect policy debates about how Congress or the Postal Service might respond, but the legal message is clear: blanket prohibitions on constitutionally protected arms are on shaky ground.

The new DOJ opinion rewrites a long-standing approach and hands a practical win to law-abiding gun owners who have been boxed in by outdated rules. It preserves sensible safety limits while restoring the ability of citizens to move their handguns through the mail when they follow the law. That outcome will shape how carriers, regulators, and courts handle firearm transport going forward.