The U.S. Justice Department is facing a firestorm of criticism from all corners of the political spectrum after reports emerged that it is considering a plan to restrict transgender Americans from owning firearms. The controversial proposal, which has not yet been finalized or officially announced, comes on the heels of a tragic shooting at a Minneapolis Catholic school in August 2025, reportedly carried out by a transgender individual, according to sources cited by the Associated Press and The Daily Wire.
While the discussions are still in their infancy, the mere suggestion that the Trump administration’s Justice Department might use its regulatory powers to declare transgender people mentally ill and thus bar them from exercising their Second Amendment rights has ignited a fierce backlash. The outrage is remarkable not just for its breadth, but for the unlikely alliances it has produced—gun rights advocates and LGBTQ organizations find themselves united in opposition to what many see as an unconstitutional and discriminatory move.
“Transgender people are less than 2% of the overall population, yet four times as likely to be victims of crime,” GLAAD stated in an email to the Associated Press. “Everyone deserves to be themselves, be safe, and be free from violence and discrimination. We all deserve leaders who prioritize keeping all of us safe and free.”
The Department of Justice, for its part, has been careful to clarify its current position. In a statement, a spokesperson explained the agency is “actively evaluating options to prevent the pattern of violence we have seen from individuals with specific mental health challenges and substance abuse disorders.” However, the department also made clear that “no specific criminal justice proposals have been advanced at this time.”
Still, the political context is impossible to ignore. Since returning to office, President Trump’s administration has taken a series of steps targeting transgender Americans, including removing them from military service, scrubbing federal websites of references to transgender identities, seeking to bar changes to sex markers on passports, and attempting to restrict transgender girls and women from participating in certain sports competitions.
Perhaps most striking is the response from the nation’s leading gun rights organizations, who are typically aligned with Republican administrations on firearms policy. The National Rifle Association (NRA), Gun Owners of America (GOA), Second Amendment Foundation, and other major groups have all issued statements forcefully condemning any attempt to enact a categorical ban on gun ownership for transgender people.
“The NRA supports the Second Amendment rights of all law-abiding Americans to purchase, possess and use firearms,” the NRA posted on X (formerly Twitter) on September 5, 2025. “The NRA does not, and will not, support any policy proposals that implement sweeping gun bans that arbitrarily strip law-abiding citizens of their Second Amendment rights without due process.” The organization added, “The Second Amendment isn’t up for debate.”
GOA was even more direct: “GOA opposes any & all gun bans. Full stop,” the group wrote in a terse statement on social media, as reported by BizPac Review. The Second Amendment Foundation echoed these sentiments, warning in a statement to Newsweek, “Beyond the bad policy and constitutional infirmities of such 'considerations' the Department of Justice has no authority to unilaterally identify groups of people that it would like to strip of their constitutional rights. SAF sincerely hopes that the reports of such considerations by the DOJ are inaccurate, as the policy reportedly being contemplated is worthy of the strongest possible condemnation and legal action.”
Independent journalist Stephen Gutowski noted, “Every major gun-rights group has now spoken against the idea of the DOJ trying to strip trans people of their gun rights en masse.” His tally included Gun Owners of America, the Second Amendment Foundation, the Firearms Policy Coalition, the National Association for Gun Rights, and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms.
Dudley Brown, president of the National Association for Gun Rights, took to social media to voice his concerns about the legal and constitutional implications. “The task of adjudicating certain people as ‘mentally defective’ for a gun ban is a judicial branch function, not an executive branch function,” he wrote. “This process—and only this process—is available today as it may apply to transgenders or to any American suffering from mental health issues, but taking rights away from any American without due process is an affront to the Constitution.” Brown further warned, “Rules enacted today to target transgender people will surely be twisted in the future to target other people as well. As history proves, any new rules the government invents today will be abused against ill-favored communities, including conservatives and law-abiding gun owners, tomorrow.”
The legal consensus among experts appears to be that any such ban would be on shaky ground. As Reason’s Jacob Sullum explained, “There is no statutory authority for such a categorical decree. Even if Congress did pass such a law, it would be unconstitutional based on current Supreme Court precedent and prevailing circuit court opinions.” The idea, he wrote, is “legally loony.”
Even within the Republican Party, which has generally supported stricter controls on transgender rights, there is division. While many Republicans support the proposed ban, the backlash from gun rights groups has led to criticism from some party members, who accuse organizations like the NRA and GOA of abandoning their principles. Social media has become a battleground for these debates, with some users expressing support for the ban, while others warn of the dangers of targeting any minority group for disarmament.
“Disarming trans individuals based purely on their self-identification flies in the face of the Constitution and the current administration's purported support for the Second Amendment,” the Second Amendment Foundation asserted. Gun rights advocates have repeatedly pointed out that, historically, government disarmament of minority groups rarely ends well and often leads to broader abuses of power.
On the other side, LGBTQ advocates argue that the focus on transgender individuals is not only discriminatory but also factually misplaced. According to GLAAD, the overwhelming majority of mass shootings in the United States are carried out by men who are not transgender. “It’s incredibly worrying that that seems to be on the table for them,” said Alejandra Caraballo, a transgender rights activist and Harvard Law School instructor, in comments to the Associated Press. “This is not something that would be that incredibly difficult to do logistically or practically but it would be politically explosive in terms of the backlash of Second Amendment groups.”
As of early September 2025, the Justice Department maintains that it is only in the process of evaluating options and has not advanced any specific proposals. However, the episode has already sparked a rare moment of unity between groups that typically find themselves on opposite sides of America’s most contentious debates. Whether this unlikely coalition will be enough to sink the idea before it ever becomes formal policy remains to be seen, but for now, the message from both gun rights and LGBTQ advocates is loud and clear: targeting transgender Americans for gun bans is a bridge too far.
As the dust settles on this week’s heated debate, one thing is certain—constitutional rights and the boundaries of government authority remain as fiercely contested as ever in American political life.
