Monday, June 22, 2026
Page 4
Ninth Circuit:
Alien Registration Requirement Doesn’t Violate Jay Treaty
Judges Say That 1794 Accord Between U.S., Great Britain Allowing Indigenous Americans to Freely Travel Across Canadian Border Not Implicated Where Indian Is Required to Provide Registration Number in Seeking Gun Permit
By a MetNews Staff Writer
The Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has answered in the negative the question of whether the Nov. 19, 1794 “Treaty of Amity, Commerce, and Navigation, Between His Britannic Majesty and the United States of America”—commonly referred to as the Jay Treaty—is violated by requiring that Indigenous Americans born in Canada obtain an alien registration number as a requisite to purchasing a firearm in the U.S.
Of chief significance are thebtreaty provisions requiring Great Britain to relinquish forts which it continued to maintain in the U.S. after the end of the Revolutionary War and to cease impressing American sailors into service on the pretext that they were deserters from the British Navy. But included in the treaty—the prime architect of which was Chief Justice John Jay—is this provision:
“It is agreed that it shall at all times be free to his Majesty’s subjects, and to the citizens of the United States, and also to the Indians dwelling on either side of the said boundary line, freely to pass and repass by land or inland navigation, into the respective territories and countries of the two parties, on the continent of America (the country within the limits of the Hudson’s Bay Company only excepted) and to navigate all the lakes, rivers and waters thbereof, freely to carry on trade and commerce with each other.”
District Court Affirmed
Isaac Craghtten, a lawful permanent resident of the United States, argued unsuccessfully in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho that under the Jay Treaty, status as an American Indian creates an exemption from compliance with the requirement ordinarily imposed on non-citizens who want to buy a gun to provide an alien registration number in filling out the federal Firearm Transaction Record Form 4473. The Ninth Circuit affirmed Wednesday in a memorandum opinion signed by Circuit Judges Kenneth Kiyul Lee, Gabriel P. Sanchez, and Holly A. Thomas.
The judges said:
“The requirement to provide an alien-registration number to obtain a firearm is consistent with the laws governing the immigration privileges of Canadian-bom American Indians. Those privileges, originally created by Article in of the Jay Treaty of 1794, are codified in 8 U.S.C. § 1359….This provision grants certain American Indians bom in Canada only a ‘right to pass the border without an alien identification number.’…They have no bearing on the requirements to obtain a firearm in the United States. As the district court correctly concluded, requiring Canadian-bom American Indians to obtain an alien-registration number to complete Form 4473 before purchasing a firearm is reconcilable with these laws, since such a requirement does not interfere with their right to pass the borders of the United States.”
Second Amendment
The Second Amendment is not offended by the requirement, the judges declared, explaining:
“[T]he form’s request for information does not prohibit Craghtten from acquiring or possessing a firearm. He can readily obtain the alien-registration number needed to complete the form. The form merely collects information to ‘ensure that a purchaser’ is eligible to purchase a firearm—in particular, to ensure that the purchaser is not unlawfully in the United States…and to facilitate the statutorily required background check.”
They noted that under 18 U.S.C. § 922(d) )(5)(A), non-citizens who are unlawfully present in the U.S. are prohibited from purchasing firearms. They reasoned that it is therefore “reasonable for non-citizens to be required to provide an alien registration number on Form 4473 to purchase a firearm” because this enables verification “that non-citizen firearm purchasers are lawfully in the United States, and therefore eligible to possess a firearm under § 922.”
The case is Craghtten v. U.S., 25-2117.
Craghtten, with Oneida of the Thames ancestry, is referred to in the opinion as “he,” but an Oct. 2, 2024 article in the Idaho Statesman says: “Isaac is nonbinary and takes gender-affirming hormones, which their doctor ships from Canada. Their legal documents from Canada list their gender as ‘X,’ as they prefer, but they were unable to do so on their Idaho drivers license.”
Copyright 2026, Metropolitan News Company