Henderson v. United States
The Court ruled that a felon barred from owning guns can still ask a court to transfer his lawfully owned firearms to a third party, as long as the arrangement leaves him with no real control over the guns.
The unanimous decision rejects the government's broader position that almost any transfer chosen by the felon counts as illegal possession, giving felons like a Border Patrol agent convicted of a drug crime a path to recover value from guns they can no longer legally hold themselves.
“What matters instead is whether the felon will have the ability to use or direct the use of his firearms after the transfer.”
The Court's core test for when a firearm transfer is legal under the felon-possession ban.
How it got here: A federal district court denied Henderson's transfer request; the Eleventh Circuit affirmed; Henderson asked the Supreme Court to resolve a circuit split.
The Case in Depth
What happened
Tony Henderson, a former Border Patrol agent, was charged with distributing marijuana and had to surrender his lawfully owned firearms to the FBI as a bail condition. After pleading guilty, federal law barred him from ever possessing guns again. He asked the FBI to transfer the guns to a friend, Robert Rosier, but the FBI refused, saying that would give Henderson illegal constructive possession.
The question before the Court
If a felon can no longer legally own his guns, can a court order them handed over to a friend or dealer instead of the felon?
Why it matters
Felons who surrender firearms during a criminal case now have a clearer path to sell or give away those guns rather than losing them outright, as long as they can show a court the recipient won't let them use or direct the guns. Federal agencies and courts gain a workable standard for handling these transfer requests nationwide.
What changes now
The case goes back to the lower courts, which must now apply the Court's standard to decide whether Henderson's proposed transfer to his friend can go forward. The lower courts will need to determine whether adequate assurances exist that Henderson would have no control over the guns. This is a final merits ruling on the legal standard, though the specific outcome for Henderson's firearms remains to be decided on remand.
What this does not decide
The Court did not decide whether Henderson's specific request to transfer guns to his friend should be approved — that is left for the lower courts on remand. It also did not disturb the rule that a court cannot return guns directly to the felon himself or approve a sham transfer leaving him in real control.
How the Court got there
The legal reasoning, step by step
- The Court explained that federal courts have long-standing equitable authority to order law enforcement to return property seized during a criminal case to its rightful owner, unless a statute limits that power.
- The Court identified the relevant limit: the federal felon-firearm ban, which prohibits a convicted felon from possessing a gun in any form, including both actual possession (physical control) and constructive possession (the power and intent to control a gun even without holding it).
- Applying that distinction, the Court held that a court cannot approve a transfer to anyone who would let the felon keep effective control over the guns, because that would just be a disguised way of giving the felon possession.
- The Court then rejected the government's broader argument that a felon violates the law merely by picking who receives the guns next, reasoning that the ban targets control over firearms, not the separate right to sell or give them away, which is a different property right the law does not touch.
- The Court found the government's position inconsistent, since the government itself agreed a felon may pick a dealer to sell his guns, showing that merely choosing a recipient does not itself amount to illegal control.
- The Court concluded that a transfer is lawful whenever a court is satisfied the recipient will not give the felon any ability to use or direct the use of the firearms, whether the recipient is a dealer or a private individual.