The Brady Act was passed, and it required a national background test be established before anyone could buy a handgun. The Act also required chief law enforcement officers (CLEO) to perform background checks until the national system could be established. Ps objected on the grounds that they were being pressed into federal service. Printz (Ps) filed separate actions challenging the constitutionality of the Brady Act's interim provisions. The District Court held that the provision requiring CLEOs to perform background checks was unconstitutional, but concluded that that provision was severable from the remainder of the Act, effectively leaving a voluntary background check system in place. A divided panel of the Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit reversed, finding none of the Brady Act's interim provisions to be unconstitutional.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.