Democratic congressional candidate Katy Padilla Stout says she supports stripping legal adults under 21 of their ability to purchase commonly owned semiautomatic rifles because their brains supposedly are not sufficiently developed.
That position surfaced in a short video promoted by LivesRobbed, a Texas gun-control organization pushing lawmakers to raise the minimum age for buying a so-called “assault rifle” from 18 to 21.
Asked whether she supported the proposal, Padilla Stout answered, “We know the frontal cortex isn’t done developing, and so I do think that makes common sense to be able to do that.”
Herrera Calls Out the ‘Brain Development’ Excuse
Brandon Herrera, the Republican nominee running against Padilla Stout in Texas’ 23rd Congressional District, quickly responded on X. Herrera wrote that his opponent was “apparently suggesting” raising the gun-buying age to 25—an inference apparently based on the popular claim that the frontal cortex continues developing until roughly that age.
My radical leftist opponent Katy Stout is now apparently suggesting we raise to age to buy a gun to 25.
Where does the Democratic Party find these people? pic.twitter.com/oMCw4XH8uM
— Brandon Herrera (@TheAKGuy) August 18, 2026
The source video promotes raising the age from 18 to 21. Padilla Stout did not expressly propose raising the age limit to 25 in the available clip, but she did propose another infringement. Padilla Stout recommended requiring young adult gun owners to obtain a sponsor to exercise their constitutional rights. She clearly believes the government should deny an enumerated constitutional right to a class of law-abiding adults based on a generalized argument about brain development.
Using vague claims of being a researcher at heart to justify gun control is not “common sense.”
The Second Amendment does not say the right of the people to keep and bear arms begins when a legislator believes the frontal cortex is mature. At 18, an American is a legal adult who can vote, sign a contract, serve on a jury, enlist in the military, and be held fully responsible under the criminal law. The notion that the same adult is too immature to purchase an ordinary semiautomatic rifle collapses as soon as the government is asked to justify it under the Constitution’s text and history.
Fifth Circuit: Adults Ages 18–20 Are Part of ‘The People’
That problem is especially glaring in Texas. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, whose jurisdiction includes Texas, addressed closely related reasoning in Reese v. ATF. The court held that 18-to-20-year-old adults are part of “the people” protected by the Second Amendment and struck down the federal prohibition preventing federally licensed dealers from selling them handguns.
The Reese court found no historical tradition supporting the government’s attempt to exclude young adults from the right. It pointed to the Founding-era militia tradition, under which 18-year-olds were expected to appear armed with weapons of their own.
Reese dealt specifically with commercial handgun sales, not a proposed restriction on semiautomatic rifles. Nevertheless, its reasoning presents a serious constitutional obstacle for politicians seeking to impose a new long-gun purchase ban on the same adults.
Federal law currently allows licensed dealers to sell rifles and shotguns to eligible buyers beginning at 18, while imposing a 21-year minimum for dealer handgun sales. Padilla Stout would extend the higher threshold to rifles Democrats label “assault weapons”—a political category generally aimed at AR-15s and other semiautomatic firearms owned by millions of Americans.
TX-23 Voters Face a Clear Choice on Gun Rights
Padilla Stout is not running as a gun-neutral moderate. She has been endorsed by Giffords PAC and has supported universal background checks, red-flag laws, and a bump-stock ban. Herrera, by contrast, openly campaigns as a Second Amendment absolutist and has called for nationwide constitutional carry.
That makes the TX-23 contest one of the clearest gun-rights matchups of the 2026 election. Voters are not merely choosing between two candidates with different regulatory preferences. They are choosing between a candidate who treats the Second Amendment as a right belonging to the people and one who believes politicians may decide when an adult is mature enough to exercise it.
Rights do not begin at 21 or 25. If rights were dependent on a fully developed brain, then very few people would have rights at all. The constitution is not a permission slip issued after the government conducts a neurological maturity assessment. Eighteen-year-old Americans are adults, and the Constitution already includes them.
About Duncan Johnson:
Duncan Johnson is a lifelong firearms enthusiast and unwavering defender of the Second Amendment—where “shall not be infringed” means exactly what it says. A graduate of George Mason University, he enjoys competing in local USPSA and multi-gun competitions whenever he’s not covering the latest in gun rights and firearm policy. Duncan is a regular contributor to AmmoLand News and serves as part of the editorial team responsible for AmmoLand’s daily gun-rights reporting and industry coverage.
