US v. Fort

Circuit 1May 12, 2026

Split Score

SplitScore: 78/100

Case Summary

Disposition

Affirmed

The First Circuit affirmed Garrito Fort’s conviction for possessing a firearm as a felon and his 60-month above-Guidelines sentence. The court held that Fort failed to make the threshold showing to present a justification defense and that his as-applied Second Amendment challenge to § 922(g)(1) lacked merit. It also found the sentence substantively reasonable.

View Full Opinion Document (PDF)

Circuit Split Identified

Legal Issue

Whether 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) is subject to, and may be struck down through, an as-applied Second Amendment challenge by individual felons.

Circuit Positions

Circuit 3

As-applied Second Amendment challenges to § 922(g)(1) are permissible and can render the statute unconstitutional in particular cases.

Circuit 6

As-applied challenges are cognizable; defendant bears burden to show the statute is unconstitutional as applied (but conviction in the case sustained).

Circuit 4Circuit 8

As-applied challenges to § 922(g)(1) are foreclosed; the statute is categorically constitutional and courts will not engage in felony-by-felony litigation.

Circuit 1(this circuit)

Issue left open; acknowledges possible as-applied challenges but declines to decide under the facts presented.

Conflict Summary

The circuits disagree on the cognizability of as-applied Second Amendment challenges to the federal felon-in-possession statute. The Third and Sixth Circuits permit such challenges (with the Third Circuit having invalidated the statute as applied to a non-violent felon and the Sixth placing the burden on the defendant), while the Eighth and Fourth Circuits hold that § 922(g)(1) is categorically constitutional and reject case-by-case inquiries. The First Circuit in this opinion acknowledges the split but expressly declines to resolve the question, leaving the issue open within the circuit.

Parties & Counsel

Parties

Appellant:Garrito Fort
Appellee:United States of America

Legal Counsel

Appellant:Theodore M. Lothstein, Lothstein Guerriero, PLLC
Appellee:Alexander S. Chen, Assistant United States Attorney (with Erin Creegan, U.S. Attorney, and Charles L. Rombeau, AUSA, on brief)