Steven Perez, known as “Lucha El,” was arrested twice for unlawful possession of firearms. First in the Bronx with a pistol purchased by a South Carolina straw purchaser; again, two weeks later, on a Massachusetts interstate along with self-identified members of a militia group carrying additional firearms, magazines, and ammunition. Perez was charged with interstate transport of firearms in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(3). A jury convicted. On appeal, Perez challenged the constitutionality of that statute under the Second Amendment and Bruen.
The panel first held that § 922(a)(3) does not meaningfully constrain an individual’s ability to “keep” and “bear” firearms under step one of Bruen’s text-and-history framework because it regulates only the mode of acquiring firearms. Reaffirming United States v. Decastro, 682 F.3d 160 (2d Cir. 2012) under Bruen, the court concluded § 922(a)(3) places minimal burdens by leaving in-state purchases and licensed transfers intact, principally barring anonymous out-of-state straw transactions.
In the alternative, the government met its burden under Bruen step two: Founding-era laws restricted cross-border movement of arms and disarmed dangerous persons, placing § 922(a)(3) within the nation’s historical tradition.
Appeal from the Southern District of New York.
Opinion by Nathan, joined by Robinson and Pérez.