18 U.S.C. § 1715

Firearms as nonmailable; regulations

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 18 CasesGoogle Scholar

Pistols, revolvers, and other firearms capable of being concealed on the person are nonmailable and shall not be deposited in or carried by the mails or delivered by any officer or employee of the Postal Service. Such articles may be conveyed in the mails, under such regulations as the Postal Service shall prescribe, for use in connection with their official duty, to officers of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Coast Guard, Marine Corps, Space Force, or Organized Reserve Corps; to officers of the National Guard or Militia of a State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District; to officers of the United States or of a State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District whose official duty is to serve warrants of arrest or commitments; to employees of the Postal Service; to officers and employees of enforcement agencies of the United States; and to watchmen engaged in guarding the property of the United States, a State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District. Such articles also may be conveyed in the mails to manufacturers of firearms or bona fide dealers therein in customary trade shipments, including such articles for repairs or replacement of parts, from one to the other, under such regulations as the Postal Service shall prescribe.

Whoever knowingly deposits for mailing or delivery, or knowingly causes to be delivered by mail according to the direction thereon, or at any place to which it is directed to be delivered by the person to whom it is addressed, any pistol, revolver, or firearm declared nonmailable by this section, shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 29 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1952–2026 · leading case: United States v. Powell

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

United States v. Powell (1975) scotus · cites it 12× “The Court of Appeals in a brief per curiam opinion held that portion of an Act of Congress prohibiting the mailing of firearms "capable of being concealed on the person," 18 U. S. C. § 1715 , to be unconstitutionally vague, and we granted certiorari to review this determination.”

United States v. Quentin Hinton, AKA Ronnie Baldwin (2000) ca9 · cites it 6× “The jury returned a guilty verdict for the following three counts: (1) causing the delivery by mail of a revolver ( 18 U.S.C. § 1715 (1999)); (2) causing the delivery by mail of ammunition ( 18 U.”

Copeland v. Vance (2018) ca2 · cites it 2× “316 (rejecting vagueness challenge to statute prohibiting the mailing of firearms "capable of being concealed on the person" (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 1715 ) ); cf. Vrljicak v. Holder , 700 F.”

State v. Crocker (1981) me · cites it 2× “Noting that the court of appeals, in sustaining the constitutional challenge, dealt with the statute generally and on a facial basis, the Court stated: While doubts as to the applicability of the language in marginal fact situations may be conceived, we think that the statute…”

Manual Enterprises, Inc. v. Day (1962) scotus · cites it 2× “II) § 4003; (4) 18 U. S. C. §§ 1715 and 1716, making criminal the mailing of firearms and injurious articles, explicitly state that the Postmaster General may make regulations governing their transmission; (5) 18 U.”

ABC Interstate Theatres, Inc. v. State (1976) miss · cites it 2× “2d 228 (1975) and held that 18 U.S.C. § 1715 , which proscribes mailing pistols, revolvers and "other fire arms capable of being concealed on the person" is not unconstitutional under the void for vagueness doctrine.”

United States v. Modina Lim (2006) ca7 “Powell, the Supreme Court held that 18 U.S.C. § 1715 , which prohibits the mailing of firearms “capable of being concealed on the person,” is not unconstitutionally vague as applied to the mailing of a 22 inch-long sawed-off shotgun.”

The People of the State of Cal v. Intelligender, LLC (2014) ca9 “If the State *1180 wished to secure compensation for those class members, it had an opportunity to do so by intervening after receiving notice of the proposed settlement pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1715 (a). This is the method CAFA established for states to seek equitable…”

IN RE D.R. (2014) dc · cites it 2× “316 (quoting 18 U.S.C. § 1715 (1970)). The Court rejected the argument that “the ‘person’ referred to in the statute to measure capability of concealment” was the individual defendant in each case.”

United States v. Channel (1976) mdd · cites it 2× “2d 228 (1975), the Court upheld as constitutional 18 U.S.C. § 1715 (1970) which prohibits mailing “[p]istols, revolvers, and other firearms capable of being concealed on the person ” (emphasis supplied).”

International Ladies' Garment Workers' Union v. DeeVille Blouse Co. (1980) paed “In Powell defendant contended that the specific language of 18 U.S.C. § 1715 — “pistols, revolvers, and other firearms capable of being concealed on the person” — limited the more general language so that the phrase “other firearms capable of being concealed on the person” would…”

United States v. Mercado-Flores (2015) prd “§ 7 (3), when the act or omission is not made punishable by an enactment of Congress); 18 U.S.C. § 1715 (making an exception to the nonmailable firearm law to, inter alia, "officers of the National Guard or Militia of a State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District; to…”

Show all 29 citing cases →

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.