Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms should be a convenience store, and in Frankfort, MI, it is! (I took this pic:)
Posted on 04/02/2024 5:58:46 AM PDT by Red Badger
The ATF can’t go after NRA members over guns with pistol braces on them.
That’s the outcome of a preliminary injunction issued by a federal judge on Friday. US District Judge Sam A. Lindsay sided with the gun-rights group and enjoined the federal agency from enforcing its rule reclassifying pistol-brace-equipped guns as short barrel rifles (SBRs) under the 1934 National Firearms Act (NFA). The decision keeps any NRA member who owns a braced gun from facing six-figure fines or imprisonment if they didn’t register their gun by last year’s deadline–something most owners didn’t do.
“[C]ompliance with the Final Rule is not discretionary, and the NRA’s members face severe penalties for their failure to comply with the Final Rule,” Judge Lindsay wrote in NRA v. ATF. “Accordingly, both of the final requirements for injunctive relief are satisfied because the threatened injury to the NRA’s members outweighs the threatened harm to the Defendants, and enforcement of the Final Rule under the circumstances will not disserve the public interest.”
The ruling is a concrete, if temporary, win for the NRA. While the group has lost millions of members due to an ongoing corruption scandal, and it’s unclear exactly how many remain, those who’ve stuck with the group will now enjoy protection from the long arm of the ATF. The decision puts NRA members under the same legal umbrella employed for members of the Second Amendment Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition, and Gun Owners of America through previous rulings.
The case stems from the ATF’s decision, at the urging of President Joe Biden, to reclassify guns with pistol braces as short barrel rifles subject to NFA regulations. Despite previously finding the devices did not convert pistols into SBRs, the ATF used federal rulemaking to reverse itself in January 2023. The result was an expansive rule that likely affects millions of gun owners across America.
“While firearms equipped with ‘stabilizing braces’ or other rearward attachments may be submitted to ATF for a new classification determination, a majority of the existing firearms equipped with a ‘stabilizing brace’ are likely to be classified as ‘rifles’ because they are configured for shoulder fire based on the factors described in this rule,” the ATF said in the rule. “Because many of these firearms generally have a barrel of less than 16 inches, they are likely to be classified as short-barreled rifles subject to regulation and registration under the [National Firearms Act (NFA)] and [Gun Control Act].”
Gun-rights groups took immediate legal action against the rule and the courts cast a skeptical eye at the ATF’s reversal. By May 2023, multiple federal judges had issued preliminary injunctions against the rule. The rule’s grace period, where the ATF allowed owners of braced guns to register their firearms tax-free without facing criminal charges, came to an end that month as well, but only between 0.6 percent and eight percent of owners complied.
By August 2023, a Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals panel found in Mock v. Garland that the rule was “unlawful” because it exceeded the ATF’s authority and ran afoul of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The panel then sent the case back down to US District Judge Reed O’Connor for further hearings on the merits of the challenge. In October 2023, he ruled the ATF’s rule violates the Second Amendment.
“[T]he Court finds that the Government Defendants’ implementation and enforcement of the Final Rule substantially threatens to inflict irreparable constitutional harm upon the [Firearms Policy Coalition] members,” Judge O’Connor, a George W. Bush appointee, wrote in Mock v. Garland. “Absent injunctive relief, the Final Rule will impair and threaten to deprive them of their fundamental right to keep and bear commonly used arms as a means of achieving the inherently lawful ends of self-defense. See U.S. CONST. AMEND. II (providing that the ‘right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.’).”
Friday’s ruling is built on the groundwork laid in Mock. Judge Lindsay, a Bill Clinton appointee, cited the Fifth Circuit’s determination that the ATF overstepped its authority in his ruling.
“Based on the reasoning in Mock, the court similarly determines that the NRA is likely to succeed on the merits of its claim that the Final Rule violates the APA because it is not a logical outgrowth of the Proposed Rule,” he wrote.
He also rejected the ATF’s argument that any harm suffered by NRA members, such as named plaintiff Dr. Carl Carlson, was self-inflicted because they chose not to register their guns during the grace period.
“[T]hat Dr. Carlson or other NRA members could have registered their firearms tax free during the grace period to avoid the $200 registration fee is quite beside the point,” Judge Lindsay wrote. “Because any costs incurred by the NRA’s members will be unrecoverable due to Defendants’ sovereign immunity from money damages, and the likely reality of NRA members facing criminal penalties and fines for noncompliance during the pendency of this lawsuit, the court determines that the irreparable harm requirement for injunctive relief is satisfied here.”
NRA members had enjoyed some level of protection from the ATF’s rule since US District Court Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk issued a nationwide injunction against the rule in November 2023’s Britto v. ATF that covered all pistol brace owners. However, in recent years, the Supreme Court has signaled opposition to nationwide injunctions issued at the district court level. Judge O’Connor and the Fifth Circuit denied previous attempts to offer legal protections for anyone other than named plaintiffs. So, Friday’s injunction could offer a more durable immunity as the case against the ATF rule continues on appeal.
The NRA celebrated the ruling as a “major victory” that it said would protect upwards of 350,000 members in Texas and millions more nationwide.
“From day one, we vowed to fight back against President Biden and his rogue regulators – and to defeat this unlawful measure,” NRA President Charles Cotton said in a statement.
The Department of Justice, which represents the ATF in federal cases, did not respond to a request for comment on the decision. A number of the brace ban challenges pending in the Fifth Circuit, including Mock and Britto, were consolidated late last year. Parties in the combined case have submitted their briefs, but the court hasn’t scheduled oral arguments yet.
Brace yourself ping!................
The leftists aren’t even close to being done with judge shopping.
I thought it was illegal to demand a firearms registry. They have gone as far as to declare a small piece of metal a “machine gun”. Hood rats running around with Glock switches and they want to pick on NRA members who want to protect their hearing and enjoy shooting. Some outfit. I say defund the ATF now.
Constitutionally, there is no need for the ‘F’ in the ATF.
IOW, get the ‘F’ OUT!.................. ..............
Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms should be a convenience store, and in Frankfort, MI, it is! (I took this pic:)
This Ping List is for all news pertaining to infringes upon or victories for the 2nd Amendment.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from this Ping List.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
The 16" rule was purely arbitrary, anyhow, as was the "gun muffler" ban.
How does this ruling affect NRA members who do NOT currently own a pistol/brace? Are they covered by this ruling as well, and in a good position to run out and buy a pistol and brace combo of their choice, or would they run afoul of the BATFE if they do?
Again, this is a strictly hypothetical question as I've seen the light to global peace and tranquility and cut all my guns up into scrap, receiver first then the barrel, and disposed of them for their scrap value.
I'm not into that kinda stuff any more, I'm just axin' out of curiosity.
Needs a cigar display.
L
In 1941, after seeing how the nazis used gun registration to disarm citizens of their guns in occupied countries, the US Congress past a resolution to NEVER REGISTER FIREARMS. This was a month or so before Pearl Harbor.
The democrats, in 1968, twisted themselves into a pretzel trying to force Federal gun registration on the US Citizens.
But don’t think they don’t know who has what! Inventory your guns to see which have a paper trail back to you. I wish I still had those I bought before the 1968 Gun Control Act was made law. They do know about those I bought from the CMP.
The whole pistol brace thing is just a way to get around the stupid law against short barreled rifles. Let’s just rid of this law and resolve the whole thing.
The Left will never stop.......................
Partly explained here -—> https://www.pewpewtactical.com/autokeycard-explained/
A youtuber is in prison for TALKING about the auto key card.
later
Yes and no. Mostly yes.
Grant Shaw and Alex Bosco (the S&B in SB Tactical) invented the first "pistol brace" for a friend who is a Vietnam vet and his service-connected disabilities left him unable to "present' a handgun in the normal fashion. So they ginned up a contraption that allowed him to present and fire more or less like a 'normal' person would.
https://www.sb-tactical.com/
Like anybody who makes devices like these, SB Tactical sent an example to the ATF to get their take on its legality. ATF's original opinion was that it's an accessory and accessories don't/can't transform a handgun into an SBR. Then they changed that and said if you fire the weapon with the brace mounted to your shoulder, that makes the handgun an SBR. Then they crawfished and said they don't dictate how devices are used, their rulings are entirely based on configuration and function.
Then they did Dementia Joe's executive fiat, which was a clear violation of 5 U.S. Code § 553, the Administrative Procedures Act (as was Trump45's fiat directing ATF to ban the bump-fire stock). and gave brace owners opportunity to "Form-1" their brace-equipped pistols into SBRs at no cost.
And now the question is on its way to SCOTUS. In the current atmosphere I don't see this surviving SCOTUS review.
And if that comes to pass, the people who get the bulk of the credit should be the ones who bought those thousands of braces intending from the outset to tempt fate use them as shoulder stocks.
The judge who made this ruling is black. And he was a Klinton appointee.
There’s a copy of the complete ruling here:
https://thereload.com/app/uploads/2024/04/Order-Granting-Preliminary-Injunction-003.pdf
If you have a braced pistol you might want to keep a copy handy in case Barney Fife decides to hassle you. My LGS has an indoor range and about weekly it changes whether they’ll allow braces on it because the ATF has specifically directed them to report anyone shooting a braced pistol.
The crux of the biscuit:
Memorandum Opinion and Order – Page 22
III. Conclusion and Preliminary Injunction
For the reasons explained, the court concludes that the NRA has associational standing to sue on behalf of its members and has met its burden of establishing each of the four requirements for a preliminary injunction. The court, therefore, grants the NRA’s Motion (Doc. 8) and request for a preliminary injunction, and it enjoins the ATF; Steven Dettelbach, in his official capacity as the Director of the ATF; the United States Department of Justice; and Merrick Garland, in his official capacity as the United States Attorney General from enforcing the Final Rule against the NRA’s members pending the final resolution of this action on the merits. In accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(d), this preliminary injunction order enjoins and applies with equal force to Defendants’ “officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys,” and “other persons who are in active concert or participation with anyone described in Rule 65(d)(2)(A) or (B),” and Defendants shall provide notice to all such persons of this preliminary injunction order.
It is so ordered this 29th day of March, 2024.
the ATF has specifically directed them to report ......
AND THE BASIS FOR THIS ‘ORDER’ IS?......................
If you'll read my post above you'll see the court order enjoins DOJ and the ATF (and all their collective tentacles) from enforcing the rule against NRA members. Period. Full stop.
What's going on is the NRA has a suit waiting for SCOTUS. This order gives all NRA members relief until SCOTUS can rule. So until that happens, all NRA members -- even ones who didn't yet own a brace, or who joined after the court's injunction -- are immune from ATF persecution for pistol braces.
Threat at the very least of losing their SOT3 and their FFL and having their store shuttered, and at worst of being being sent to prison.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.