A Florida court has ruled that a state law prohibiting adults aged 18 to 20 from carrying concealed firearms is unconstitutional. This decision affects young adults in Florida who wish to exercise their Second Amendment rights. The ruling underscores the ongoing debate over gun rights and age restrictions in the United States.
The case, Jaylen Tyrus Eubanks v. State of Florida (No. 4D2025-1698), was decided by the District Court of Appeal of Florida on June 17, 2026. The court's opinion stated that restricting law-abiding adults aged 18 to 20 from exercising their right to self-defense is a violation of the Second Amendment. This ruling could have significant implications for gun laws across the country.
The dispute began when Jaylen Tyrus Eubanks, then 18, was charged with carrying a concealed firearm after police found a handgun on him during a stop in 2024. Eubanks argued that the law preventing him from obtaining a concealed carry permit violated his constitutional rights. The trial court denied his motion to dismiss the charges, leading to his appeal.
The court found that the law, specifically section 790.06(2)(b) of the Florida Statutes, which disqualified adults aged 18 to 20 from obtaining a concealed carry permit, was unconstitutional. The ruling emphasized that such a restriction creates a “second-class” right to bear arms for those young adults. The court stated, “Restricting 18- to 20-year-olds—members of the same ‘political community’ as other law-abiding adults—from rights to self-defense would make the Second Amendment a ‘second-class’ right.”
Judge Levine, who authored the opinion, highlighted that the Second Amendment protects the right of all law-abiding adults to bear arms. The court pointed to historical context, noting that at the time of the founding, 18-year-olds were considered adults and expected to serve in the militia. The ruling referenced several U.S. Supreme Court cases that have shaped the understanding of the Second Amendment, including District of Columbia v. Heller and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.
The court ruled that the Florida law was facially unconstitutional, meaning it cannot be applied in any situation without violating the Second Amendment. The opinion stated, “No set of circumstances exists in which the statute can be constitutionally applied.” This ruling aligns with recent decisions from other federal courts that have also found similar age restrictions unconstitutional.
The impact of this ruling extends beyond Eubanks. It sets a precedent that could influence how states regulate firearm possession and carry rights for young adults. The decision may prompt lawmakers to reevaluate age restrictions on gun ownership and carry laws, potentially leading to broader access for younger individuals to exercise their Second Amendment rights.
In addition, this ruling may inspire similar legal challenges in other states where age restrictions on firearm possession exist. The court's decision reinforces the notion that constitutional rights should not be limited based on age alone, particularly when it comes to fundamental rights like self-defense.
Looking ahead, the state of Florida may choose to appeal this ruling to a higher court. If appealed, the case could eventually reach the Florida Supreme Court or even the U.S. Supreme Court, which may further clarify the scope of Second Amendment rights for young adults. As this legal landscape continues to evolve, the implications of this ruling will be closely monitored by both advocates and opponents of gun rights.