The National Rifle Association of America (NRA) has filed a lawsuit challenging the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) “Engaged in the Business” Final Rule. The ATF’s Final Rule unlawfully redefines when a person is “engaged in the business” of dealing in firearms and therefore required to be federally licensed. This new lawsuit is being filed on the heels of recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions that have reined in executive branch agencies from acting outside of statutory authority. The NRA suit is named Butler v. Garland and has been filed in the U.S. District Court in Alabama (Northern District, Eastern Division).
“The ATF’s Final Rule stands to turn countless upstanding and well-intending citizens into criminals for exercising their constitutional rights,” said Randy Kozuch, Executive Director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA). “When ATF released this Final Rule, NRA promised to use every means necessary to stop this egregious interpretation of the law. Now that the Supreme Court’s recent decisions in Loper Bright, Cargill, and Rahimi make clear that the ATF does not have unfettered authority to arbitrarily restrict NRA Members’ rights to buy and sell firearms, the NRA is fighting back.”
NRA, along with two individuals, Don Butler and David Glidewell, filed the lawsuit challenging the ATF’s Final Rule in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama. The complaint alleges that the Final Rule violates the Administrative Procedure Act because it exceeds the ATF’s statutory and jurisdictional authority and is arbitrary and capricious; violates the Fifth Amendment because it is unconstitutionally vague; violates the Second Amendment by infringing the rights to keep, bear, buy, and sell arms; and violates the Separation of Powers, non-delegation doctrine, and Take Care Clause by usurping legislative powers and prohibiting lawful conduct by executive fiat.
In this Armed Attorneys Video, Emily Taylor and Richard Hayes discuss the effect of the new ATF Final Rule.
Under the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act (FOPA) of 1986 (which amended the Gun Control Act of 1968), someone is “engaged in the business” of dealing in firearms if that person “deal[s] in firearms as a regular course of trade or business with the principal objective of livelihood and profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms.” The 2022 Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA) altered that definition by replacing “livelihood and profit” with “to predominantly earn a profit.” The BSCA did not alter FOPA’s exclusion for “a person who makes occasional sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal collection of firearms.”
On April 19, 2024, ATF promulgated the Final Rule “to clarify the criteria for determining when a person is ‘engaged in the business.’” The Final Rule provides that “there is no minimum threshold number of firearms purchased or sold that triggers the licensing requirement” and that “there is no minimum number of transactions that determines whether a person is ‘engaged in the business’ of dealing in firearms. For example, even a single firearm transaction or offer to engage in a transaction . . . may require a license.”
The Final Rule also excludes firearms acquired for “personal protection” from the firearms that may be sold from a personal collection without a license. The ATF’s Final Rule thus rewrites the law, contradicts Congress’ statutory language, and adds confusion rather than clarification.
Share the post "NRA Challenges ATF Final Rule on Private Gun Sales"
Will you be traveling out of state this spring? Or do you have questions about your own state’s firearms laws? Then you’ll want to have quick access to summaries of gun laws in America’s 50 states. Here’s a very valuable online resource you may want to bookmark.
The NRA-ILA (Institute for Legislative Action) has a great feature on the NRA-ILA’s homepage. There is a pull-down menu that includes all 50 states plus the District of Columbia, New York City, and Guam. This quickly provides a host of legal information for each region you select. From the NRA home page, NRA-ILA.org, you can instantly access a host of information for all 50 states. NOTE: Some of this information is not completely current, so you may want to check with more detailed, up-to-date reference, such as the Legal Heat $10 50 State Guide to Firearms Laws and Regulations (2023 Edition). Most of the information in the book is also available in the FREE Legal Heat Firearms Law APP for Android (Google) smartphones and Android mobile devices. Here are screenshots from the Legal Heat Android App.
Shown below is part of the NRA-ILA’s coverage for Texas. There is a summary of the most important Texas gun laws. Below that is a map showing the states that recognize Texas carry permits.
Share the post "Gun Laws for 50 States on NRA-ILA Site and Legal Heat App"
In the case of Nguyen v. Bonta, plaintiffs have been granted summary judgment in a federal challenge of California’s One-Gun-A-Month (OGM) purchase law. This is a major win for gun rights in California. Under current California law, even after passing multiple background checks, a California citizen may only purchase one firearm every 30 days. This violates the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution, argued plaintiffs lead by the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF). U.S. District Judge William Q. Hayes agreed, granting plaintiffs summary judgement, which is essentially a case victory based on legal principles. However, Judge Hayes, stayed his decision for 30 days to allow defendants to appeal. The case will probably be appealed by California to the liberal-leaning 9th Circuit.
In his 24-page decision, Federal District Court Judge Hayes wrote, “Defendants have not met their burden of producing a ‘well-established and representative historical analogue’ to the OGM law. The Court therefore concludes that Plaintiffs are entitled to summary judgment as to the constitutionality of the OGM law under the Second Amendment.”
“The state of California tried to justify the OGM law in part on the grounds that it is a lawful regulation imposing conditions on the commercial sale of arms,” noted SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “However, there is nothing in the Second Amendment remotely connected to limiting the number of firearms a person can purchase. This limitation is blatantly unconstitutional, and if this ruling is appealed by the State of California, we intend to defend the lower court’s correct decision.”
“This is a win for gun rights and California gun owners”, said Alan M. Gottlieb, SAF founder and Executive Vice President. “There is no historical justification for limiting law-abiding citizens to a single handgun or rifle purchase during a one-month period, and Judge Hayes’ ruling clearly points that out.”
SAF is joined by the North County Shooting Center, San Diego County Gun Owners Pac, PWGG, LP, Firearms Policy Coalition and six private citizens including Michelle Nguyen, for whom the case is named. They are represented by attorney Raymond M. DiGuiseppe of Southport, N.C. The case was filed in December 2020 and is known as Nguyen v. Bonta.
Share the post "Big Gun Rights Victory in California One-Gun-A-Month Challenge"
UPDATE: On 2/5/2024, the 9th Circuit granted a stay of Judge Benitez’s injunction ruling. So Californians may NOT purchase ammunition from out of state. CLICK Here for CRPA update and watch video below for details.
NOTE: The Benitez Ruling Explained Below Has Been Blocked by the 9th Circuit
Big news for California gun owners. You can now purchase ammunition online and have it shipped directly to your residence in California. And you can purchase ammo at California gun shops without paying for a background check. A Federal Judge has issued an injunction that blocks application of California laws requiring costly background checks for ammo purchases. NOTE: Right now, Californians can buy ammo without these restrictions, but it is possible that the Ninth Circuit could change things very soon. Act now while you can. Being able to mail-order ammunition from major vendors outside California makes ammo more affordable for Californians.
On January 30, 2024, in the case of Rhode v. Bonta, U.S. Federal District Court Judge Roger Benitez issued an order blocking the application of California laws which place severe limits on ammunition purchases by Californians. Benitez ruled that California’s laws requiring background checks on ammunition purchases were unconstitutional and invalid on multiple grounds. As noted by the San Diego Union-Tribune: “U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez ruled that such restrictions violate the Second Amendment. He also ruled that the portion of the law restricting out-of-state purchases violated the dormant Commerce Clause and is preempted by federal law regulating interstate transportation of firearms.”
Washington Gun Law Video Explains the Key Legal Points of Judge Benitez’s Order:
The Associated Press reports: “California residents don’t have to pay for and pass a background check every time they buy bullets, a federal judge has ruled. The Tuesday [1/30/2024] ruling by U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez took effect immediately. California Attorney General Rob Bonta [then] asked Benitez on Wednesday to delay the ruling[.]” Subsequently, Judge Benitez issued an order denying Bonta’s stay request. So, until the 9th Circuit acts, the injunction stands and Californians can buy ammo without a background check.
Four years ago, in April 2020, Judge Benitez had issued a preliminary injunction blocking California’s ammo background check laws. But days later the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals issued a stay of that injunction, effectively negating the Benitez ruling, and putting California’s unconstitutional laws back into effect. But there have been significant changes now based on recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions, in particular the Bruen case: “After the Supreme Court’s 2022 ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. v. Bruen, the 9th Circuit sent the case back to Benitez to be relitigated under that new framework, which holds that modern gun laws must be ‘consistent with the nation’s historical tradition of firearm regulation’.” (SD Union-Tribune).
Share the post "Federal Judge Rules California Ammo Laws Are Unconstitutional"
Starting at 1:00 pm PST, SHOT Show will host two very important meetings that are key to the defense of Americans’ Second Amendment Rights in this country. First, the Governor’s Forum will be held. Many governors (mostly from “red” states) are expected to attend. This will be followed at 4:00 pm PST with the NSSF State Attorneys General Forum.
NSSF Governors Forum
NSSF will host several governors to speak about the importance of the firearm industry to their state, efforts to attract firearm- and ammunition-related businesses and the benefits of those businesses to their state economies today. The Governors’ Forum will be held today from 1-2 PM at The Venetian Expo, Palazzo M (5th Floor).
NSSF Attorneys General Forum
Several state attorneys general will gather for a first-ever event involving the top law enforcement agents in several states. “Boots & Badges” will be a laid back and interactive discussion with several state attorneys general fighting the legal battle against the Biden administration and other politically-driven attacks against the firearm and ammunition industry and Second Amendment rights. The event will be held today from 4-5 PM on the Great Outdoors Plaza, right outside Caesars Forum.
Here is a recording from last year’s 2023 Governors Forum:
Will you be traveling out of state this spring? Or do you have questions about your own state’s firearms laws? Then you’ll want to have quick access to summaries of gun laws in America’s 50 states. Here’s a very valuable online resource you may want to bookmark.
The NRA-ILA (Institute for Legislative Action) has a great feature on the NRA-ILA’s homepage. From the NRA home page, NRA-ILA.org, you can instantly access a host of information for all 50 states. There is a menu box that includes all 50 states plus the District of Columbia, New York City, and Guam. Look for the box that appears below the “NRA-ILA Top Stories Banner”:
Alternatively, look at the UPPER LEFT for three horizontal lines. Click that to open a drop-down menu. Then select the third line Gun Laws > State Gun Laws. That will open a page with all the 50 states listed in order A to Z. Or bookmark the NRA-ILA State Gun Laws Page.
NOTE: Some of this information is not completely current, so you may want to check with more detailed, up-to-date reference, such as the Legal Heat $20 50 State Guide to Firearms Laws and Regulations (2023 Edition). Most of the information in the book is also available in the FREE Legal Heat Firearms Law APP for Android and iOS (Apple) mobile devices. Here are screenshots from the Legal Heat iPhone App.
Shown below is part of the NRA-ILA’s coverage for Texas. There is a summary of the most important Texas gun laws. Below that is a map showing the states that recognize Texas carry permits.
Share the post "Access Gun Laws for All 50 States — FREE Online Resource"
Everytown Comes Out from Behind the Curtain
By Larry Keane, NSSF Senior V.P. and General Counsel
For years, gun control organizations have been seeking to dismantle the bipartisan Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA). That’s the crucial federal law shielding firearm manufacturers and sellers from frivolous lawsuits designed to bankrupt law-abiding businesses by blaming them for the criminal misuse of lawfully-sold firearms … and impose gun control through court-ordered settlements. It is what former Clinton Secretary of Labor Robert Reich dubbed “regulation through litigation”.
Gun control advocates have unsuccessfully urged Congress to repeal the law, falsely claiming it provides total immunity from all lawsuits — a falsehood regularly repeated by President Joe Biden even though the media has fact-checked him and said it is not true. In court, these groups have unsuccessfully challenged the PLCAA’s constitutionality. Attorney General Merrick Garland testified before Congress that the PLCAA was Constitutionally-sound, despite the contrary rhetoric coming from The White House and the gun ban lobby. They continue to ask courts to misapply the law’s exceptions (disproving the total immunity claim). All these efforts are designed to open up a new floodgate of frivolous litigation against the industry not seen since the late 1990s and early 2000s. It was that litigation which the bipartisan PLCAA prevents.
Now, the enemies of the Second Amendment have opened up a new line of attack on the PLCAA. Surreptitiously led by the Bloomberg-funded Everytown for Gun Safety, they have convinced a few “Blue” antigun legislatures to pass unconstitutional “public nuisance” (anti-PLCAA) statutes. These statutes attempt an end run around the PLCAA to set the table for a renaissance of reckless lawsuits against members of the industry. NSSF is challenging the Everytown-backed laws in New York, New Jersey, Delaware, California, Illinois, Washington and Hawaii.
____________________________________________
Everytown’s masquerade as a champion of responsible firearm regulation is a sham. Their actions speak louder than their hollow words. By actively participating in “public nuisance” lawsuits and championing laws like Hawaii’s HB 426, Everytown lays plain its intention to undermine the PLCAA and smother the firearm industry with irrational restrictions that only erode the Second Amendment rights of Americans and do nothing to make communities safer. Their track record of manipulating tragic events for their own political gain is morally reprehensible.
The 38th annual Gun Rights Policy Conference (GRPC), co-hosted by the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, will be held Friday-Sunday, September 22-24, 2023, in Phoenix, Arizona. The conference is FREE to attend, if you pre-register. CLICK HERE to register online.
The theme of this year’s event, which will be held at the Marriott Phoenix Airport Hotel, is “Road to Liberty!”. GRPC Registration is available online at the SAF website. If you are near Phoenix that weekend, you may definitely want to attend. For those unable to attend, the conference will be featured on multiple platforms including YouTube and Facebook.
As in the past, this year’s conference and all materials are FREE!
This year’s conference will be attended by more than 600 gun rights advocates and activists and will feature a veritable “Who’s Who” of leaders in the Second Amendment movement. More than 80 speakers will offer presentations on a variety of subjects, including legislation, the upcoming 2024 elections, firearms litigation, ATF policy changes, and more.
Notable scheduled speakers this year include Alan Gottlieb, Adam Kraut, Stephen Hallbrook, John Lott, Massad Ayoob, Mark Smith, AWR Hawkins, John Correia, Ryan and Tom Gresham, Mark Walters, Stephen Gutowski and representatives and staff from SAF, CCRKBA, FPC and GOA as well as leaders of state organizations. Learn more about the speakers on the GRPC Speaker Bio Page.
Gun Rights Policy Conference Schedule
Friday, September 22: The conference begins with registration and an evening reception, 7-9 pm.
Saturday, September 23: The conference gets fully underway with panel discussions, individual presentations, and the annual awards luncheon. It’s an all-day event running from 8 am to 6 pm.
Sunday, September 24: The conference has more panel discussions and reports from 9 am to 1 pm.
SAF founder and Executive V.P. Alan Gottlieb said this year’s GRPC event occurs at a critical time for the Second Amendment movement: “Our rights have been under continuing and unrelenting attacks from the Biden administration. While we have seen several Second Amendment victories in the courts and the various state legislatures. We are witnessing continued growth in the number of legally-armed citizens, with more than half of the states now enjoying Constitutional/permitless carry.”
Share the post "Gun Rights Policy Conference Next Week in Phoenix, Arizona"
Would you like gun and outdoor industry companies to learn what products you favor, or what types of hunting you prefer? Then you may want to take a FREE SURVEY.
Your responses help the hunting, recreational shooting, and defensive firearms markets develop new products and improve services. The results are shared with conservation and advocacy groups, allowing them to advance conservation and pro-second amendment issues. To participate, go to ShooterSurvey.com or HunterSurvey.com. NOTE: An email address is required.
Here are some interesting results from recent surveys:
NOTE: Results exceed 100% because many shooters use multiple firearms and/or bow types.
NOTE: Results exceed 100% because many hunters pursue multiple species.
If you take the survey, you get a chance to win a $100 gift card. Each quarter, respondents are entered into a drawing for one of five $100 gift cards to the outdoor retailer of their choice.
About Shooter Survey and Hunter Survey
Southwick Associates launched the HunterSurvey and ShooterSurvey in 2006 to help state Fish & Wildlife Agencies, conservation organizations, and the outdoor equipment industry understand what hunters, recreational target shooters, and personal protectors want and need. Survey results reflect the attitudes and habits of hunters and recreational shooters across the United States and are analyzed to develop new products, provide better services, and make smarter decisions that help improve public hunting, recreational shooting, and protection opportunities.
All survey responses are kept strictly confidential. Only summaries of the responses are used in reporting. However, to take the survey you must provide an email address to Southwick Associates. We recommend you NOT sign up with a primary business or personal email.
This article copyright 2023 AccurateShooter.com. No reproduction is allowed.
Share the post "You Can Participate in Nat’l Shooting Sports and Hunting Surveys"
ATF Rule was overturned by U.S. District Court, but DOJ appealed that ruling.
The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and its partners are challenging the “Final Rule” issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (BATFE) redefining frames and receivers as firearms. A U.S. District Judge in Texas initially ruled against the BATFE, but the Bureau appealed that ruling. SAF has filed an appellate brief in the case, known as VanDerStok v. Garland. Joining SAF in the legal challenge are Defense Distributed, and JSD Supply.
SAF’s brief explains how ATF redefined the term “firearm” without any Congressional action. Last year, the agency announced a Rule expanding the definition of firearm to include unfinished firearm components and kits used in the process of manufacturing a firearm. SAF and its partners are asserting ATF violated the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). A federal District Court judge agreed and concluded that ATF had acted in excess of its statutory authority, and granted summary judgment.
SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb promised the organization will pursue this case vigorously as it winds through the court system: “This case challenges the authority of the ATF to change rules and definitions of firearms without Congressional authority,” Gottlieb said. “We simply cannot allow any federal agency to make up its own rules as it goes along, without Congressional approval.”
Judge O’Connor’s ruling in VanDerStok v. Garland vacated the controversial ATF Final Rule that effectively changed the definition of a firearm under Federal law. However the BATFE has challenged that ruling.
SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut said the foundation expects to prevail on the portions of the Final Rule that we challenged: “The district court entered a judgment deeming the Rule illegal and vacating it,” Kraut said, “and we are asking the Fifth Circuit to affirm the district court’s decision to issue relief based on the APA. By promulgating the Rule, ATF has appropriated authority reserved for Congress. Such a usurpation of power is antithetical to our system of government and must be stopped.”
Share the post "SAF Challenges ATF Rule on Frames and Receivers on Appeal"
Sadly, Shooting USA host and respected outdoor sports journalist Jim Scoutten has passed at age 77, following a brief illness. Noted as “one of the most iconic voices in the shooting sports industry”, Jim Scoutten hosted the popular Shooting USA cable television broadcast for decades. He was a leading force in the firearms industry. This Editor had the chance to meet Jim on many occasions at SHOT Show, and I can confirm that he was a talented man of high integrity who was dedicated to advancing the shooting sports and protecting Second Amendment freedoms. The Shooting USA series will continue hosted by Jim’s capable son John Scoutten.
Yesterday, the Shooting USA Facebook page stated: “It is with great sadness that we announce the passing of Jim Scoutten. In his thirty years of reporting the shooting sports, Jim played a pivotal role in the industry and will be greatly missed.” Jim’s concluding message from each show was, famously: “As always, shoot safely, shoot often, and keep ‘em in the ten ring.”
Here are just a few of the 1,000+ comments on Facebook:
I watched Jim for many years. What a wealth of knowledge he was. Thank you Jim for all you did for the shooting sports, your legacy will live on! Even though I am rarely in the “ten ring”, I will keep shooting often! Rest in peace Sir!
There are a lot of heavy hearts tonight. Jim is a LEGEND. My condolences to the family. Thank You, Sir, for your devotion to the industry and to shooters everywhere. Rest easy.
He was such an icon in the shooting industry! Was so proud I made one his shows from Bianchi Cup. My condolences to the family.
He always made Wednesday night TV something to look forward to. He was so passionate towards the shooting sports and outdoors communities.
Jim did so much for the industry and was truly respected. Prayers to his family.
Jim Scoutten Was a Notable Defender of the Second Amendment
In the early 1990s Jim worked on the American Shooter TV program, which was then followed by the very popular Shooting USA series. Media leaders praised Jim’s contribution to the shooting world and his role in protecting Second Amendment Rights.
“Jim leaves a strong legacy as a tireless defender of shooting, firearms, and our Second-Amendment rights. His voice was unique and powerful; we will honor Jim by carrying on in the endless fight to defend the Constitution and will support his family and team as they forge a new future for Shooting USA.” — Mitch Petrie, V.P. Programming of Outdoor Sportsman Group Networks.
“Jim Scoutten [reported] the stories of the shooting industry and the competitive shooting disciplines since 1993. In [30] years of broadcasting on four national networks, he’s done more to popularize the shooting sports than any other individual or organization, reaching multiple generations with the invitation to bring out your guns and enjoy some competition.” — Garry Mason, Outdoor Legends Hall of Fame.
During [Jim Scoutten’s] tenure, the American Shooter TV program became the highest-rated outdoors television program in history, garnering more than one million fans nationwide. In recent years, Scoutten has been a part of the Shooting USA program, a show that he has co-hosted with his eldest son John, and the Sighting In with Shooting USA program, both series appearing on Outdoor Channel along with full seasons on My Outdoor TV (MOTV).
In this Shooting USA episode, Jim Scoutten showcased High Power Silhouette Rifles.
A Franklin, Tennesse resident, Scoutten’s firm but gentle voice and familiar smile were eagerly welcomed into the homes of America’s shooting enthusiasts for three decades, an invitation that made him the most watched firearms reporter in industry history thanks to his knowledge of firearms, his passion for the shooting sports, and journalistic integrity that marked his long career.
Share the post "Shooting USA’s Jim Scoutten Passes Away at Age 77"
An over-reaching rule recently imposed by the Biden Administration-controlled ATF has been halted by a Federal judge in Texas. In the VanDerStok v. Garland case, U.S. District Judge Reed O’Conner vacated the ATF’s “Final Rule” which treated unfinished frames and receivers the same as if they are functional firearms. The Truth About Guns Blog notes: “In another blow to the Biden Administration’s ongoing war on the gun industry and firearm owners, a Federal judge has thrown out the ATF’s attempt at regulating gun parts and partial receivers as complete firearms.”
“After earlier issuing an injunction blocking ATF enforcement, United States District Court Judge Reed O’Connor ruled yesterday that the ATF overstepped its regulatory authority by skirting the legislative process and, in effect, unilaterally re-writing the Gun Control Act of 1968 in order to allow it to regulate gun parts as it does complete firearms. O’Connor vacated the agency’s rule granting the plaintiffs summary judgement.” — Truth About Guns Blog.
Judge O’Connor issued his 38-page decision last week. The Order stated: “This case presents the question of whether the federal government may lawfully regulate partially manufactured firearm components, related firearm products, and other tools and materials in keeping with the Gun Control Act of 1968. Because the Court concludes that the government cannot regulate those items without violating federal law, the Court holds that the government’s recently enacted Final Rule, Definition of ‘Frame or Receiver’ and Identification of Firearms, 87 Fed. Reg. 24,652 (codified at 27 C.F.R. pts. 447, 478, and 479), is unlawful agency action taken in excess of the ATF’s statutory jurisdiction. On this basis, the Court vacates the Final Rule.”
O’Connor added: “A part that has yet to be completed or converted to function as frame or receiver is not a frame or receiver. ATF’s declaration that a component is a ‘frame or receiver’ does not make it so if, at the time of evaluation, the component does not yet accord with the ordinary public meaning of those terms.”
Judge O’Connor’s ruling in VanDerStok v. Garland vacates the controversial ATF Final Rule that effectively changed the definition of a firearm under Federal law.
Judge O’Connor further observed that previous regulatory actions do NOT justify rulings that are clearly beyond the scope of ATF authority: “If these administrative records show, as Defendants contend, that ATF has previously regulated components that are not yet frames or receivers but could readily be converted into such items, then the historical practice does nothing more than confirm that the agency has, perhaps in multiple specific instances over several decades, exceeded the lawful bounds of its statutory jurisdiction.”
This video covers the Preminary Injunction previously issued in VanDerStok vs. Garland
The Firearms Policy Coalition wrote: “Our victory in VanDerStok v. Garland vacated the ‘Frame or Receiver’ Final Rule and restored the pre-rule status quo. The era of unchecked disarmament schemes is over. You can find case details at FPCLaw.org.
Second Amendment Foundation founder Alan M. Gottlieb stated: “This decision amounts to another court blow to Joe Biden’s anti-gun agenda, which threatens the very Constitution he swore to uphold and defend when he took office.” And SAF Exec. Director Adam Kraut added: “This case is one more example of the Biden administration’s ongoing effort to exceed its authority in an effort to place as many restrictions as possible on the rights of law-abiding gun owners. We are pleased the court took this decisive action, and we will litigate this issue to finality, if and when the government appeals.”
Share the post "Federal Judge Vacates ATF Rule on Unfinished Receivers/Frames"
NSSF Governors Forum
Would you like gun and outdoor industry companies to learn what products you favor, or what types of hunting you prefer? Then you may want to take a 
ATF Rule was overturned by U.S. District Court, but DOJ appealed that ruling.
