On Tuesday, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reaffirmed the constitutionality of the federal prohibition on private possession of machine guns, rejecting a direct challenge to 18 U.S.C. § 922(o) in a case involving a shooting involving a handgun modified by a machine gun conversion device (MCD).

In United States v. Jamaion Wilson, a unanimous panel led by Judge Don R. Willett affirmed Wilson’s conviction for unlawful possession of a machine gun, holding that such weapons remain outside the protection of the Second Amendment. The court said the decision reinforces longstanding circuit precedent and resists calls to reconsider it in light of evolving firearm technology or the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen.

Wilson pleaded guilty to violating § 922(o) after using a handgun equipped with a “Glock Switch”. This small, illegal machine gun conversion device (MCD) converts a semiautomatic pistol into a fully automatic machine gun. Mr. Wilson used his firearm to kill a seller who allegedly sold him a fake firearm in a 2023 Texas gas station parking lot confrontation. Prosecutors charged him with a machine gun possession offense, which carries a maximum 10-year sentence.

On appeal, Wilson argued that the near-total ban on machine guns enacted in 1986 through the Hughes Amendment violates the Second Amendment, particularly post-Bruen. He claimed that modern proliferation of conversion devices has made machine guns “common” today.

The Fifth Circuit disagreed, relying heavily on its 2016 decision in Hollis v. Lynch, which held that machine guns are “dangerous and unusual” weapons not in “common use” for lawful purposes and thus unprotected. Under the circuit’s rule of orderliness, panels are bound by prior decisions unless overruled en banc or by the Supreme Court.

Wilson attempted to bypass Hollis by citing updated ATF statistics showing hundreds of thousands, or potentially millions, of machine guns in circulation when including illegal devices. The court dismissed this as irrelevant, noting that only lawfully possessed firearms count toward “common use” for self-defense, the core purpose protected by the Second Amendment.

Citing the most recent Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) data from June 2025, the panel pointed out that while 740,000 machine guns are registered in the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record, the vast majority are owned by government entities, law enforcement, or dealers for official purposes such as selling to the government. Critically, only approximately 234,718 are transferable to private civilians, a figure, according to the court, is comparable to the 175,000 cited by Hollis nearly a decade ago.

“Firearms held by police and military entities are irrelevant to the ‘common use’ inquiry,” the opinion stated, emphasizing that private, lawful ownership for self-defense remains extraordinarily rare.

The court also rejected the argument that Bruen—which requires gun regulations to align with historical tradition—implicitly overruled Hollis. Nothing in Bruen unequivocally disturbed Hollis‘s conclusion, anchored in District of Columbia v. Heller‘s description of machine guns like the M-16 as quintessential “dangerous and unusual” arms.

The Fifth Circuit stressed that illegal proliferation does not render machine guns “common” under the Second Amendment. Only widespread, lawful use by law-abiding citizens for legitimate purposes qualifies.

Gun rights advocates view the decision as another lower court resisting Bruen‘s full implications, while supporters of restrictions hail it as preserving a critical limit on machine guns. The opinion solidifies the machine gun ban in Texas, Louisiana, and Mississippi, where the Fifth Circuit holds sway.

Unless reheard en banc or taken up by the Supreme Court, private civilians remain barred from possessing new machine guns or conversion devices made after 1986. They could face up to 10 years in federal prison for violations.

Wilson, who received the statutory maximum sentence, saw his conviction and 120-month term affirmed in full.

DOJ Declares Federal Ban on Mailing Handguns Unconstitutional in Landmark Opinion

About John Crump

Mr. Crump is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people from all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons, follow him on X at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.