Attorney General Kathy Jennings announced today that, in a major victory for gun safety, the Delaware Supreme Court has ruled House Bill 451—a law passed by the Delaware General Assembly to restrict access to certain firearms to those aged 21 and older—constitutional.

“Guns are the leading cause of death for kids and teens in our country and nothing should be off the table to change that,” said Attorney General Kathy Jennings. “This is a reasonable regulation to reduce gun violence, gun suicides, and accident among young adults while respecting the family traditions, hobbies, and lifestyles of sportsmen and hunters. The Court overwhelmingly recognized that and we are grateful for the ruling.”

Governor John Carney signed HB 451— prohibiting individuals under the age of 21 from purchasing, owning, possessing, or controlling most firearms, with certain exceptions (e.g., shotguns and muzzle load rifles in deference to hunters) — into law on June 30, 2022. In response, Delaware’s NRA affiliate sued to overturn the law. In August of 2025, the Delaware Superior Court sided with the plaintiffs, overturning the law; Jennings appealed that ruling to the Delaware Supreme Court. On Tuesday, September 8 the Court ruled 4-1 with Jennings.

…[T]he Superior Court found that the General Assembly had an important governmental objective for H.B. 451 – addressing the epidemic of gun violence by individuals aged eighteen to twenty. The court also determined that the legislation was substantially related to achieving the government’s objective of reducing gun violence for that age group. But the court ultimately concluded that H.B. 451was unconstitutional because it overburdened the right of individuals in that age group to bear arms in self-defense. 

On appeal, the State argues that the Superior Court erred in its burden analysis by making unsupported or incorrect assumptions about exceptions to the law. The plaintiffs … claim that the court should have applied the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent “history and tradition” test to declare H.B. 451 unconstitutional. … [W]e hew to our means-scrutiny precedent and decline to adopt the newly created history and tradition federal test. We also agree with the State that the Superior Court erred in its burden analysis. Thus, we reverse. 

With the Superior Court’s ruling now overturned, the law goes back into effect.

Print