TexasCHLforum.com

Court Strikes Down Biden's 'Ghost Gun Rule'

Defense Distributed's Case in US District Court, VanDerStrok v. Garland was just granted a preliminary injunction. The lawsuit is challenging the scope of ATF's ability to change the definition of firearms...The case now heads to the 5th Circuit, where ATF will have to defend its position.

Looks like the ATF is going down in flames on several legal fronts. The courts are finding that they have very clearly overstepped their bounds, which has been the case for far too long.

Paladin wrote: Sun Mar 05, 2023 3:09 pm Court Strikes Down Biden's 'Ghost Gun Rule'

Defense Distributed's Case in US District Court, VanDerStrok v. Garland was just granted a preliminary injunction. The lawsuit is challenging the scope of ATF's ability to change the definition of firearms...The case now heads to the 5th Circuit, where ATF will have to defend its position.

Looks like the ATF is going down in flames on several legal fronts. The courts are finding that they have very clearly overstepped their bounds, which has been the case for far too long.

And, hopefully, every legal precedent set regarding that overstepping helps inform the next case brought against the ATF for the same sort of overreach. Somewhere, at some point, we have to return to the sanity of the Founders' purpose behind the different branches of government. The legislative branch makes laws, not the judicial branch...or the executive branch.

Paladin wrote: Sun Mar 05, 2023 3:09 pm Court Strikes Down Biden's 'Ghost Gun Rule'

Defense Distributed's Case in US District Court, VanDerStrok v. Garland was just granted a preliminary injunction. The lawsuit is challenging the scope of ATF's ability to change the definition of firearms...The case now heads to the 5th Circuit, where ATF will have to defend its position.

Looks like the ATF is going down in flames on several legal fronts. The courts are finding that they have very clearly overstepped their bounds, which has been the case for far too long.

Bruen is having a massive impact! I love it.

The case now heads to the 5th Circuit, where ATF will have to defend its position.

I don’t think think this is correct. The federal district court has not yet heard this case, the judge only issued some injunctions against the implementation of the rule against certain companies until a trial on the merits of the plaintiffs’ case can be held. I believe both sides in this asked for summary judgment, which he granted to neither, so this will still have to go to trial. The loser is likely to go to the fifth circuit court, but it has to be tried at District first.

The Annoyed Man wrote: Sun Mar 05, 2023 11:47 pm Bruen is having a massive impact! I love it.

Under the auspices of West Virginia v. EPA really - by the principle of separation of powers they would have to prove “clear congressional authorization” for the authority they claim. They can't, and they won't. They lose. In this particular situation "authorization" goes all the way up past Congress to the bill of rights, which does not grant them squat for authority. Whatever geniuses who cooked this regulatory rampage up may have a long time to regret it, like what happened with Roe v. Wade. Thought they had total cover with a sympathetic regime in power, got greedy, reached too far for too much and lost it all. This all has the same kind of vibe to it. More than just restrictions about frames & braces are liable to get unraveled here. Wouldn't break my heart a bit to do so. It's only been what, the past 14-15 years that serious progress has been made against infringements on bearing arms that have bedeviled citizens across multiple jurisdictions for decades, for in excess of a century in some places. The Big Four I call them, District of Columbia v. Heller - McDonald v. City of Chicago - New York State Rifle & Pistol Co. v. Bruen - West Virginia v. EPA - may there one day soon be a Big Five. Frustrating that moves like these weren't done sooner, a LOT sooner. But considering what is going on now in the nation and in the world, the timing couldn't be more fortuitous.

Bolton Strid wrote: Tue Mar 07, 2023 10:16 pm

The Annoyed Man wrote: Sun Mar 05, 2023 11:47 pm Bruen is having a massive impact! I love it.

Under the auspices of West Virginia v. EPA really - by the principle of separation of powers they would have to prove “clear congressional authorization” for the authority they claim. They can't, and they won't. They lose. In this particular situation "authorization" goes all the way up past Congress to the bill of rights, which does not grant them squat for authority. Whatever geniuses who cooked this regulatory rampage up may have a long time to regret it, like what happened with Roe v. Wade. Thought they had total cover with a sympathetic regime in power, got greedy, reached too far for too much and lost it all. This all has the same kind of vibe to it. More than just restrictions about frames & braces are liable to get unraveled here. Wouldn't break my heart a bit to do so. It's only been what, the past 14-15 years that serious progress has been made against infringements on bearing arms that have bedeviled citizens across multiple jurisdictions for decades, for in excess of a century in some places. The Big Four I call them, District of Columbia v. Heller - McDonald v. City of Chicago - New York State Rifle & Pistol Co. v. Bruen - West Virginia v. EPA - may there one day soon be a Big Five. Frustrating that moves like these weren't done sooner, a LOT sooner. But considering what is going on now in the nation and in the world, the timing couldn't be more fortuitous.

Polymer80 has also just filed for an injunction against the ATF.