New BATF ruling on stabilizing braces today

[PRasko]

FPC AND FPCAF WIN: Fifth Circuit Rules that ATF Pistol Brace Rule is Likely Illegal

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and FPC Action Foundation (FPCAF) announced that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in Mock v. Garland, finding that FPC and FPCAF are likely to win on the merits of their lawsuit challenging ATF’s pistol brace rule.

www.firearmspolicy.org

 

[Mgderf]

FPC AND FPCAF WIN: Fifth Circuit Rules that ATF Pistol Brace Rule is Likely Illegal

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and FPC Action Foundation (FPCAF) announced that the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in Mock v. Garland, finding that FPC and FPCAF are likely to win on the merits of their lawsuit challenging ATF’s pistol brace rule.

www.firearmspolicy.org

 

[HoosierLife]

Woohoo! So you’re not a felon?

 

[Alamo]

I read the opinion one time and here’s what I got out of it:

The plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their argument that the ATF violated the APA. The ATF violated APA by proposing and taking comments on one rule (Work sheet) but promulgating a different final rule (the six factors subjective test).

ergo, the district court judge was wrong about the inital injunction, because he believed the plaintiffs did not have the likelihood to succeed. The fifth circuit is sending the case back to him to fix that error and decide appropriate relief, but otherwise not providing direction on what he should do.

Because the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the APA grounds the appeals court did not consider the constitutional arguments.

There’s some possibility I might be wrong. Don’t wave your pistol brace in the ATF’s face just yet.

 

[JAL]

I read the opinion one time and here’s what I got out of it:

The plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the merits of their argument that the ATF violated the APA. The ATF violated APA by proposing and taking comments on one rule (Work sheet) but promulgating a different final rule (the six factors subjective test).

ergo, the district court judge was wrong about the inital injunction, because he believed the plaintiffs did not have the likelihood to succeed. The fifth circuit is sending the case back to him to fix that error and decide appropriate relief, but otherwise not providing direction on what he should do.

Because the plaintiffs are likely to succeed on the APA grounds the appeals court did not consider the constitutional arguments.

There’s some possibility I might be wrong. Don’t wave your pistol brace in the ATF’s face just yet.

The District Court has 60 days to fix its original decision with a Preliminary Injunction. I expected the APA grounds would step in front of a constitutional question as that is the normal procedure in the District and Circuit Appellate Courts . . . if some other fatal flaw is found, that is pursued, and the constitutional question is put into abeyance unless it's otherwise unavoidable. Not so with SCOTUS, though.

 

[BiscuitsandGravy]

 

[Mgderf]

 

[Alamo]

The District Court has 60 days to fix its original decision with a Preliminary Injunction. …

The appeals court went to some effort to note that nationwide injunctions are and should be rare, and explicitly stated that they were not telling the district court how to do the injunction. So it seems possible the prelim injunction could be quite narrow in scope and limited in relief.

 

[JAL]

I just watched this and Mark makes some interesting observations about the 5th Circuit decision . . . some of which apparently chides -- in legal terms -- BATFE about its Rule, pointing out some of its absurdities. As already mentioned . . . the District Court grinds onward and we'll have to see what transpires there. If the injunction isn't sufficient . . . expect another interlocutory appeal to 5th Circuit.

 

[Route 45]

So…if this brace rule is declared to be illegal, will that cancel all of the new “free” SBRs? Will the entire process be declared moot? Will owners have a choice to keep the gun registered as an SBR or have it removed from the registry because “LOL, brace goes back on?”

Muy confuso.

 

[cbhausen]

So…if this brace rule is declared to be illegal, will that cancel all of the new “free” SBRs? Will the entire process be declared moot? Will owners have a choice to keep the gun registered as an SBR or have it removed from the registry because “LOL, brace goes back on?”

Muy confuso.

I asked @Aszerigan this very question. He said once something goes on the registry it stays there.

 

[nonobaddog]

So…if this brace rule is declared to be illegal, will that cancel all of the new “free” SBRs? Will the entire process be declared moot? Will owners have a choice to keep the gun registered as an SBR or have it removed from the registry because “LOL, brace goes back on?”

Muy confuso.

Do not expect any fee refunds and there is no way in hell it can be removed from the registry.

 

[Alamo]

. . . some of which apparently chides -- in legal terms -- BATFE about its Rule,

I haven’t watched the video yet but at one point in the opinion the ATF‘s rule redrafting is described as “pulling the rug out from under the public.”

ETA: Full refunds and erasure from the registry should be part of the permanent relief.

 

[Route 45]

Do not expect any fee refunds and there is no way in hell it can be removed from the registry.

I think you are mistaken. Seems like you can indeed remove an SBR from the registry.

If I no longer want a short-barreled rifle (SBR) and I remove the “brace,” do I need to contact the NFA to un-register my SBR with an attached “stabilizing brace”? | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

It is not a requirement to remove your SBR from the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR); however, ATF highly recommends you notify the Government Services Branch (GSB) of the National Firearms Act Division to remove the firearm from the NFRTR registry. All NFRTR updates...

www.atf.gov

ETA: Full refunds and erasure from the registry should be part of the permanent relief.

What fees?

 

[Alamo]

What fees?

Anyone who has paid the tax to register their braced pistol as an SBR. It was “free” before May 1st, but after that you would have to pay the $200

 

[Alamo]

I just watched this and I think he gets a little far out in front of his skis, like a lot of Youtubers. Nothing constitutional got decided, just that the federal District Court asked to issue a preliminary injunction.

The Armed Scholar has a better video on this, altho he likes to use click-baity titles.

 

[Cameramonkey]

I just watched this and I think he gets a little far out in front of his skis, like a lot of Youtubers. Nothing constitutional got decided, just that the federal District Court asked to issue a preliminary injunction.

The Armed Scholar has a better video on this, altho he likes to use click-baity titles.

I just cant watch Armed Scholar. His style and delivery just rubs me wrong.

 

[Route 45]

Anyone who has paid the tax to register their braced pistol as an SBR. It was “free” before May 1st, but after that you would have to pay the $200

Not sure who waited until after May 31 to decide to SBR a braced pistol. $200 is the normal tax stamp to make an SBR, same as it was before the "amnesty" period.

 

[nonobaddog]

I think you are mistaken. Seems like you can indeed remove an SBR from the registry.

If I no longer want a short-barreled rifle (SBR) and I remove the “brace,” do I need to contact the NFA to un-register my SBR with an attached “stabilizing brace”? | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

It is not a requirement to remove your SBR from the National Firearms Registration and Transfer Record (NFRTR); however, ATF highly recommends you notify the Government Services Branch (GSB) of the National Firearms Act Division to remove the firearm from the NFRTR registry. All NFRTR updates...

www.atf.gov

You can believe that if you want. Personally I don't believe there has ever been a single tiny piece of data regarding guns ever deleted by our government.

 

[Route 45]

You can believe that if you want. Personally I don't believe there has ever been a single tiny piece of data regarding guns ever deleted by our government.

That's not the point. I'm talking about SBRs and removing them from the registry. If you get a letter from ATF stating that your SBR has been removed, that's all you need to make it back into a regular rifle and buy/sell/trade as such, without the registry/paperwork BS.

I'm talking about reality. I'm well aware that registries are BS. I'm not real worried about what the government knows about me, though. They know a hell of a lot more about me (and you, too) than gun stuff.