Based on results, ATF can’t, either.
She’s just wondering if “ghost guns” can also fire 800 rounds a second.
It’s OK to say “she,” isn’t it?
Tag: receiver
VanDerStok at SCOTUS
I don’t know what’s so damn hard to understand about “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”
Do the Right Thing
27 states urge Supreme Court to reject Biden administration’s rule defining gun parts [More]
The court’s ability and inclination to produce favorable future rulings depends on what happens in November, for those of you who believe sitting on your hands because it doesn’t make any difference is defensible.
[Via Jess]
The Sum of Its Parts
The Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms has submitted an amicus brief to the U.S. Supreme Court in a case challenging the ATF’s “Final Rule” equating firearms parts kits and gun components with functioning firearms. [More]
Let’s hope they’re right that “the Supreme Court will not allow that to happen.”
BATFE Slapping
Today, attorneys for Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) filed a merits-stage Respondents’ brief with the United States Supreme Court in FPC’s Garland v. VanDerStok lawsuit challenging ATF’s “Definition of ‘Frame or Receiver’ and Identification of Firearms” Rule. FPC’s brief, available at FPCLaw.org, explains why the government’s Rule cannot survive scrutiny and must fail. [More]
Mark W. Smith of The Four Boxes Diner breaks it down for us.
[Via Jess]
Battle Plans
SAF PREPARING FOR SCOTUS FALL HEARING IN VANDERSTOK CASE [More]
I’m not sure the “Authority to regulate firearms is solely in the hands of Congress” argument won’t ultimately come back to bite us. Perhaps if someone could point out which clause in the Constitution delegates the authority to override “shall not be infringed,” my worries would be quelled…
Paved with Good Intentions
The brief recalls how Congress enacted the Gun Control Act of 1968 pursuant to the Commerce Clause with no intention of discouraging or eliminating the private ownership or use of firearms by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes. [More]
That’s not how the bill’s author felt:
ALL “gun control” is just another incremental step to the end goal– citizen disarmament. We don’t do ourselves any favors by believing otherwise and arguing that in court.
More Than a Ghost of a Chance
Slap Down
The Fifth Circuit panel ruled that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ Final Rule is illegal. Circuit Judge Kurt D. Englehardt wrote, “An agency cannot label conduct lawful one day and felonious the next—yet that is exactly what ATF accomplishes through its Final Rule. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED to the extent it holds unlawful the two challenged portions of the Final Rule, and VACATED and REMANDED as to the remedy.” The case is known as VanDerStok v. Garland. [More]
A Justice Department that was true to the Constitution would be enforcing rights and punishing government transgressors.
Fingers Crossed…
Justices grant four new cases, including Chevron companion case [More]
So I might get my bump stock back?
[Via Jess]
Staying Power
The Ghost is Clear?
In Vanderstok federal case involving challenges to ATF’s rulemaking concerning Biden’s Ghost Gun regulations redefining frames and receivers, the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals agreed to uphold the lower court’s preliminary injunction pending the outcome of this lawsuit. [Watch]
There’s still a way to go, but for now, it’s the antis that are set back.
Tangentially-Related UPDATE
THIS KEEPS GETTING WORSE: Anti-Gun 9th Circuit Judges Playing Games With the 2nd Amendment [Watch]
Judicial Nazgûl continue to circle…
[Via Jess]
A Yes or No Question
Mark W. Smith appreciates the directness.
Going Through the Motions
The district court judge in our lawsuit challenging the ATF’s “frame or receiver” rule granted Defense Distributed and 80 Percent Arms’ motions for injunction pending appeal, meaning it can’t be enforced against them while the case continues. [More]
If Founding Intent were applied to everything, the whole damn fraudulent house of cards would collapse.
[Via bondmen]
Pressing Onward
The Second Amendment Foundation and its partners in a challenge of the “Final Rule” issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives redefining frames and receivers as firearms, have filed an appellee’s brief in the case, known as VanDerStok v. Garland. [More]
There’s a word for a government that can just assign itself new powers when it feels like it.
The Likely Outcome?
SCOTUS ‘Ghost Gun’ Vote Underscores Importance of Vetting Judicial Candidates on Second Amendment
Today’s SCOTUS vote putting a hold on O’Connor’s block shows a Bruen Second Amendment majority does not necessarily reflect across-the-board solidarity on the separate issue of regulatory authority. And at least one of the votes is no surprise. [More]
Think of one job you’ve applied for where you’d have gotten it if you decided to play coy with the hiring managers.
A Setback for Now Thanks to Two ‘Conservatives’
Supreme Court temporarily reinstates ban on “ghost guns” [More]
I submitted an AmmoLand article centered on the Roberts/Barrett punt.
Coming to Terms
FPC AND FPCAF WIN: Fifth Circuit Denies Government Attempt to Reinstate ATF’s Redefinitions of “Frame or Receiver” and “Firearm” [More]
So what about the government’s ability to redefine bump stocks as machineguns and when will all this legal gobbledegook translate into getting my property back?
[Via Jess]
