SAF files motion in case challenging ATF frame and receiver rule

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and Defense Distributed on April 24 filed a motion for summary judgment in Defense Distributed v. Blanche (formerly VanDerStok v. Bondi), challenging the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) rule that expands the definition of “firearm” in the efforts of the Biden administration to regulate so-called “ghost guns.”

In April 2022, the ATF published its Final Rule amending the regulatory definition of the term “firearm” to encompass precursor parts that, with enough additional manufacturing operations, could become functional firearms frames or receivers, but in their current state were nonfunctional — and critically, non-firearm — objects. In seeking to regulate these “non-firearm objects” the ATF’s Final Rule directly contradicted Congress’ definition of “firearm” set forth in the Gun Control Act of 1968. The ATF’s re-definition of “firearm” in the Final Rule establishes a practical ban on the private manufacture of firearms — a constitutionally protected tradition.

In another court case: BFA and partners ask court to strike down NFA rules on suppressors, short-barreled rifles

“This rule was one of the primary attacks by the Biden Administration on the ability of peaceable citizens to acquire arms,” said Bill Sack, SAF senior director of legal operations. “Self-manufacturing firearms for personal use is a time-honored tradition that countless citizens still practice, and one that is entirely legal under federal law. The frame and receiver rule that we have challenged here was promulgated with the goal of making self-manufacture so legally confusing as to dissuade Americans from exercising their rights.”

In December 2022, SAF filed to intervene in an existing lawsuit in the Northern District of Texas then known as VanDerStok v. Garland. The case challenged the lawfulness of ATF’s regulatory re-definition of a “firearm” under the Administrative Procedures Act. SAF scored a major victory in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, which vacated significant portions of the Rule. The Biden Department of Justice, however, appealed to the Supreme Court, which ruled on only a portion of the lawsuit. Today’s motion for summary judgment seeks vindication on the remaining claims.

“We would love for the current administration to pre-emptively rescind the Biden era rule and fix the problems it creates,” said Alan M. Gottlieb, SAF founder and executive vice president. “But unless and until the ATF acts of its own accord, we have a duty to our members and supporters to push these claims full steam ahead. The rule as it stands has major legal infirmities that need to be aired out in court if the rule is going to be left in place as written.”

Republished with permission from the Second Amendment Foundation.