⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit hears oral argument in a sealed juvenile delinquency case. The appellant, a minor, was adjudicated in federal court for possessing machine gun conversion devices, commonly called Glock switches, which he had transferred to another person. These small plastic parts, when attached to a semi-automatic pistol, allow the gun to fire continuously with a single trigger pull. The appeal raises two questions. First, did the federal government have jurisdiction to prosecute the juvenile under the Juvenile Delinquency Act, which directs that a juvenile be turned over to state authorities unless the Attorney General certifies one of a few narrow grounds for proceeding in federal court? Here the government certified that the state had no jurisdiction over the charged conduct. Mississippi at the time had no law banning possession of machine gun conversion devices on their own, but it did prohibit juveniles from possessing handguns. The appellant argues that the federal case nonetheless relied on evidence of a handgun fitted with a switch, conduct the state could have handled itself. The government responds that the only federal charge concerned the conversion devices. Second, the appellant argues that the federal machine gun statute is unconstitutional as applied to possession of the devices alone, unattached to any firearm. The government responds that this circuit's own precedent already forecloses that argument. The case tests how the Supreme Court's framework for Second Amendment challenges applies to firearm accessories.

Sealed v. Sealed Juvenile (No. 24-60348) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, argued August 4, 2026.