Disclaimer: Yes, this post is political. School nurses are duty-bound to confront policies that threaten kids’ health, using the tools of public health: prevention, harm reduction, and evidence.
School nurses are frontline public health professionals. We assess, intervene, educate, prevent, advocate, and respond—often all within the same school day. We are the bridge between health and learning, and the steady presence that helps keep school communities safe. Our work is grounded in protecting the health, safety, and well-being of children.
When a policy threatens that safety—physically, mentally, or emotionally—we are obligated to act. The Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2025 (H.R. 38/S. 65) is one glaring example. This post is political because policy shapes the conditions in which children live and learn. It is professional because school nurses are duty-bound to identify and respond to threats to children’s health. It focuses on public health principles, including prevention, harm reduction, and evidence-based action. We cannot separate our advocacy from our expertise. We cannot protect children if we remain silent when policies put them in harm’s way.
What Is Concealed Carry Reciprocity?
The Constitutional Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act of 2025, currently moving through Congress, should alarm every educator, parent, and health professional. If enacted, it would require every state to honor the concealed-carry rules of every other state—including those with no permit, no training, and minimal or no vetting. That means someone allowed to carry a hidden, loaded gun under the weakest standards in the nation could legally carry in states that deliberately chose stronger safeguards to protect children and communities.
For those of us working in schools, this is not an abstract policy debate. Firearms remain the leading cause of death for children and teens in the United States. Pediatric firearm deaths have risen in recent years, disproportionately harming Black youth and communities already facing structural inequities. A federal concealed-carry mandate would not “respect rights.” It would supercharge an already dangerous landscape for our students.
How This Bill Collides With Gun-Free School Zones
Federal law already attempts to keep guns away from K–12 school environments through the Gun-Free School Zones Act and related statutes. In plain terms, federal law generally prohibits guns on and around K–12 campuses but includes a major exception for people licensed by a state to possess or carry a handgun. The Giffords Law Center summary on “Guns in Schools” explains that while the Gun-Free School Zones Act deems K–12 schools to be “gun-free zones,” the prohibition does not apply to many individuals with state-issued carry licenses.
H.R. 38/S. 65 would go even further by forcing states to honor other states’ permits—or even permitless “constitutional carry” status—across their borders. In practice, that would mean more armed adults moving through the very “gun-free” school zones federal law is supposed to protect, and it would deepen an already dangerous loophole by exporting the weakest state standards into every community. It also creates legal tension between older federal school-zone protections and a new federal mandate to recognize out-of-state carry, making enforcement harder just as the stakes for children remain life-and-death.
What This Bill Would Mean
H.R. 38/S. 65 would override states that currently require:
-
permits
-
background checks
-
hands-on or live-fire training
-
higher minimum age requirements
Gun safety organizations warn that this mandate would dramatically increase the number of people carrying loaded, concealed guns in parks, playgrounds, school zones, and public transportation—regardless of local standards. Law enforcement leaders have also raised alarms: a patchwork of dozens of permit systems, layered on top of federal school-zone rules and existing loopholes, would be nearly impossible to verify in real time, increasing the risk of dangerous encounters for both officers and civilians.
Research consistently shows:
-
States that weaken concealed-carry laws see higher rates of gun assaults.
-
Children in states with weaker gun laws face significantly higher firearm mortality.
-
Firearms have remained the leading cause of youth death for multiple consecutive years.
More guns in more public spaces—with fewer safeguards—do not create safer schools. They create more trauma, more funerals, and more children carrying chronic fear into the classroom.
The School Nurse’s View From the Front Lines
School nurses operate at the intersection of physical safety, mental health, and systemic gaps. We are present for lockdown drills. We see students with symptoms of anxiety that present as physical complaints. We hear the questions from students seeking reassurance: Could someone bring a gun here?
Gun violence harms children long before a trigger is pulled. Exposure alone—hearing gunshots in the neighborhood, knowing a victim, or participating in repeated drills—is linked to depression, anxiety, and post-traumatic stress symptoms. When policymakers normalize carrying hidden, loaded guns in more public spaces, they normalize a chronic psychological burden for children.
A federal reciprocity mandate would undercut the higher protections many communities and states have fought for—often after tragedy—by flooding the 1,000-foot “school zone” envelope with more armed adults from other jurisdictions, while law enforcement and prosecutors wrestle with conflicting rules and existing licensing exceptions. For school health professionals, this is not prevention. It is policy-driven exposure.
Current Status of H.R. 38 / S. 65
-
H.R. 38 (House version): Passed out of the House Judiciary Committee; awaiting potential House floor consideration. Track it at congress.gov.
-
S. 65 (Senate version): Introduced and referred to the Senate Judiciary Committee; no further action yet. Status is available on congress.gov.
Neither bill is law. H.R. 38 is moving toward a possible House vote. This is a critical window for school nurses and child-health advocates to act before the bills advance further.
A Call to Action for School Nurses and Advocates
The good news: there is still time to influence the outcome. Here’s what you can do today:
Contact Your Members of Congress
Tell them to oppose H.R. 38 and S. 65. Frame it as a child health and school safety issue, not just a gun policy debate. Use the Congressional directory to find your legislators: https://www.congress.gov/members/find-your-member.
Share Your Expertise
Partner with pediatricians, mental health professionals, and gun violence prevention organizations to share research showing how permissive gun laws increase assault, mortality, and trauma for children.
Mobilize Action
Collective advocacy influences public action. Organizations such as Brady United, Everytown for Gun Safety, and the Giffords Law Center provide data, tools, and advocacy platforms that school nurses can amplify.
For those of us who work in school health, here’s the practical bottom line: national reciprocity would mean more guns moving in and around our school zones, more confusion for those trying to enforce the law, and a new wave of efforts to chip away at the federal protections we still have. Unless parents, educators and health professionals speak up—loudly and together—our silence will be interpreted as consent.
