Results 1 to 9 of 9

Thread: SCOTUS will hear FPC's "ATF 'frame or receiver' rule" lawsuit (VanDerStok v. Garland)

  1. #1

    SCOTUS will hear FPC's "ATF 'frame or receiver' rule" lawsuit (VanDerStok v. Garland)

    https://twitter.com/gunpolicy/status...17949096497413


    VanDerStok v. Garland - FPC Lawsuit Challenging the ATF's "Frame or Receiver" Rule
    https://www.firearmspolicy.org/vanderstok
    {Firearms Policy Coalition | undated}

    Summary: Federal lawsuit challenging the ATF's "frame or receiver" rule.

    Plaintiffs: Jennifer VanDerStok, Michael Andren, Tactical Machining, and Firearms Policy Coalition

    Defendants: Attorney General Merrick Garland, United States Department of Justice, ATF Directer Stephen Dettelbach, and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives

    Litigation Counsel: R. Brent Cooper, Cody Wisniewski, Kaitlyn Schiraldi, and Erin Erhardt

    Docket: N.D. TX case no. 4:22-cv-00691, Fifth Circuit case nos. 22-11071, 22-11086, 23-10463, and 23-10718, Supreme Court case nos. 23A82, 23A302, and 23-852 | CourtListener Docket

    Key Events & Filings:

    Supreme Court (Merits)


    Supreme Court (Injunctions Pending Appeal)


    Supreme Court (Summary Judgment Stay)


    Circuit Court (Merits)

    [... continued at link: https://www.firearmspolicy.org/vanderstok ...]
    The Bastiat Collection · FREE PDF · FREE EPUB · PAPER
    Frédéric Bastiat (1801-1850)

    • "When law and morality are in contradiction to each other, the citizen finds himself in the cruel alternative of either losing his moral sense, or of losing his respect for the law."
      -- The Law (p. 54)
    • "Government is that great fiction, through which everybody endeavors to live at the expense of everybody else."
      -- Government (p. 99)
    • "[W]ar is always begun in the interest of the few, and at the expense of the many."
      -- Economic Sophisms - Second Series (p. 312)
    • "There are two principles that can never be reconciled - Liberty and Constraint."
      -- Harmonies of Political Economy - Book One (p. 447)

    · tu ne cede malis sed contra audentior ito ·



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #2
    Supreme Court agrees to hear dispute over Biden administration's "ghost guns" rule
    https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ghost-g...dministration/
    {Melissa Quinn | 22 April 2024}

    Washington — The Supreme Court on Monday agreed to review a lower court decision that invalidated a rule from the Biden administration that aimed to address the proliferation of crimes involving "ghost guns."

    The regulation at issue was implemented by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in April 2022 and imposed a series of requirements on manufacturers and sellers of so-called ghost guns, which are unserialized firearms that can be assembled from kits sold online.

    ATF's rule changed the definition of "firearm" under the Gun Control Act to include certain weapon parts kits, and clarified that it includes partially completed parts such as the frame or receiver. As a result of the regulation, covered manufacturers and sellers have to obtain licenses, mark their products with serial numbers, run background checks and keep purchase records, which are all required for firearms made and sold in the U.S.

    The rule applies to all ghost guns, including those made with 3D printers or sold as assembly kits.

    A group of gun owners, advocacy groups and ghost gun distributors filed a lawsuit against ATF in August 2022, arguing that the two portions of its rule, regarding the term "frame or receiver" and definition of "firearm," exceeded its authority. A federal district court in Texas sided with the challengers, finding that the Gun Control Act doesn't "cover weapon parts, or aggregations of weapon parts," regardless of whether they can be assembled into "something that may fire a projectile."

    The district court invalidated the entire regulation, including those that were not at issue in the lawsuit.

    The Biden administration appealed, and the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit halted the lower court's order as to the unchallenged portions of the rule. The Supreme Court then paused the full decision in a 5-4 ruling, allowing ATF to enforce the restrictions while legal proceedings continued. Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joined with the three liberal justices in the majority.

    The 5th Circuit later ruled that the Gun Control Act's definition of "firearm" doesn't encompass weapon parts kits, and invalidated the provision of the rule involving the term "frame or receiver."

    The Justice Department asked the Supreme Court to review the appeals court's decision in February, arguing that it contradicts the plain text of the Gun Control Act.

    "Under the Fifth Circuit's interpretation, anyone could buy a kit online and assemble a fully functional gun in minutes — no background check, records, or serial number required," it told the Supreme Court. "The result would be a flood of untraceable ghost guns into our nation's communities, endangering the public and thwarting law-enforcement efforts to solve violent crimes."

    The Biden administration told the court that weapon parts kits can be converted into a fully functional firearm in just 21 minutes, and ghost guns allow felons, minors and others barred from buying firearms to circumvent the law.

    If left in place, the 5th Circuit's ruling would give the manufacturers and distributors of weapons parts the "green light to resume unfettered distribution" without background checks, records, or serial numbers, posing an "acute threat" to public safety, the Biden administration said.

    It noted that since 2017, there has been a 1,000% increase in the number of ghost guns recovered by law enforcement each year.

    The challengers to ATF's rule also urged the Supreme Court to decide its validity "once and for all." They told the high court in a filing that the provisions of the rule are "fundamentally incompatible" with the Gun Control Act's definition of firearm.

    "This expanded definition upsets the delicate balance struck by Congress between the commercial production and sale of firearms and the non-commercial making of firearms by law-abiding citizens," the group said.

    They accused the Biden administration of seeking to destroy the industry that caters to law-abiding citizens making their own guns and said that if the definition of "firearm" is now considered unsatisfactory, it's an issue for Congress to address.

    "ATF is not free to expand the scope of the GCA without Congress's blessing," the challengers argued.

    The case will be argued in the Supreme Court's next term, which begins in October.

  4. #3

  5. #4

  6. #5

  7. #6
    Just donated another $20 to FPC.

    https://secure.firearmspolicy.org/donate-fpc
    “It is not true that all creeds and cultures are equally assimilable in a First World nation born of England, Christianity, and Western civilization. Race, faith, ethnicity and history leave genetic fingerprints no ‘proposition nation’ can erase." -- Pat Buchanan

  8. #7
    Last edited by Occam's Banana; 05-01-2024 at 05:21 PM.

  9. #8
    RE: Bianchi v. Brown (Maryland "assault weapon" ban)

    RE: Harrel v. Raoul (Illinois "assault weapon" & standard magazine bans)



  10. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  11. #9
    FPC doing warm-ups for its own SCOTUS case:

    Quote Originally Posted by Occam's Banana View Post
    They're coping and seething and seething and coping ...

    https://x.com/shannonrwatts/status/1801975437381316721


    The Group Helping the Supreme Court Rewrite America’s Gun Laws Is Worse Than the NRA
    https://slate.com/news-and-politics/...mp-stocks.html
    {Dahlia Lithwick & Mark Joseph Stern | 15 June 2024}

    [bold & underline emphasis added - OB]

    [...]

    David Pucino: [...] The volume of work that comes out of the administrative state is not something that the Supreme Court can analyze in this way, at least not in any sort of reasonable manner, and I don’t think they would ever even pretend to. But what you have here is a particular, favored constituency that is bringing these questions. And then, all of a sudden, the court decides to drop everything and figure out how this gun works. Now, the way ATF does that is to sit down and actually look at the firearm. They’re going to bring in their experts and make those determinations. But the way the Supreme Court does it is they look at an amicus brief by the Firearms Policy Coalition and co-sign it.

    Lithwick: That’s the group that created the six graphics and a gif that Justice Thomas used to illustrate how semiautomatic rifles work. Why was it notable that he copied and pasted their material into a Supreme Court opinion?

    Pucino: The National Rifle Association is not what it used to be, and that’s created a gap. And what has gone into the gap are a bunch of further-right organizations that are trying to take the mantle of the NRA by being as extreme as possible. Foremost among them is the Firearms Policy Coalition. Friday was a real moment for them. It’s one of the most extreme groups; it uses extraordinarily violent rhetoric. And it’s putting out material that’s getting blessed by a majority opinion of the Supreme Court. You have to take a step back and look at where we are—I don’t think that’s anything you could imagine happening even 10 years ago.

    [...]
    THREAD: Trump Bans Bump Stocks [UPDATE: struck down by SCOTUS]



Similar Threads

  1. ATF's Frame/Receiver Rule VACATED!!!
    By Matt Collins in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 07-15-2023, 08:23 AM
  2. SCOTUS agrees to hear case re: "independent state legislature doctrine"
    By Occam's Banana in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 06-30-2022, 09:12 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-06-2015, 07:56 AM
  4. MO-Man gets "arrested" and told "frame somebody or you're going to prison"
    By Anti Federalist in forum U.S. Political News
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 03-18-2014, 01:30 PM
  5. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 03-17-2010, 06:04 PM

Select a tag for more discussion on that topic

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •