‘Jihad-Curious’ Student Can’t Blame Gun Range For Illegal Firearm Rental, Court Rules
Handgun (Source: Unsplash) © Tampa Free Press
Posted For:
A federal appeals court has upheld both the conviction and 78-month prison sentence of a Nigerien student who claimed he was misled into illegally renting firearms because of incomplete paperwork at a Texas shooting range.
In a decision issued Tuesday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit ruled that Moctar Ahmadou—who was in the United States on a student visa—cannot rely on an “entrapment by estoppel” defense. Ahmadou argued that the Texas Gun Club’s liability form misinformed him by failing to list non-immigrant visa holders among those prohibited from possessing firearms.
The court rejected that argument, concluding that mistakes by a private business do not shield someone from violating federal law. Writing for the majority, Circuit Judge Jerry E. Smith emphasized that a gun-range employee or dealer is not a government official and therefore cannot provide legally binding assurances about what federal law allows.
“The form merely implies—it does not affirmatively represent—that the listed categories are the only ones covered,” Judge Smith wrote. “TGC did not ‘actively assure’ Ahmadou that certain conduct is legal.”
Ahmadou’s case stems from a May 2021 visit to the Texas Gun Club, during which he rented firearms and filled out the standard waiver. At the time, he was already under FBI surveillance. After his arrest, investigators said Ahmadou admitted he was practicing in preparation to “commit jihad overseas if there was a need.” A forensic review of his electronic devices revealed extensive ISIS propaganda, including more than 100 videos showing executions and beheadings.
Although Ahmadou was not charged with a terrorism offense, these findings factored heavily into the sentencing decision. The district court judge described Ahmadou’s repeated viewing of violent extremist material and his contact with a known terrorist as clear indicators that he posed a public danger. Ahmadou argued this violated his First Amendment rights, claiming he viewed the content for “religious curiosity,” but both the trial court and the Fifth Circuit rejected that explanation.
The appellate panel was not unanimous on the sentencing issue. Circuit Judge James L. Dennis dissented in part, arguing that the district court blurred the procedural distinction between a guidelines-based “departure” and a discretionary “variance,” making its reasoning unclear. He said he would have sent the case back for clarification. The majority concluded that any ambiguity was harmless and allowed the 78-month sentence to stand.
About Post Author
