National Pistol Brace Litigation Post 01/31

[Yarome]

Ruh-oh.... District court in TX denied FPC's filing for injunctive relief, or alternatively, a delay on the effective date of the rule.

The court stated the FPC failed to prove ANY of the 4 criteria necessary... IOW... sided completely with the ATF that they are within their authority to make new law.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Ruh-oh.... District court in TX denied FPC's filing for injunctive relief, or alternatively, a delay on the effective date of the rule.

The court stated the FPC failed to prove ANY of the 4 criteria necessary... IOW... sided completely with the ATF that they are within their authority to make new law.

View attachment 1394077

Short term bad news. Long term maybe good news; appeal up to SCOTUS?

 

[Yarome]

Short term bad news. Long term maybe good news; appeal up to SCOTUS?

I think it will eventually end up before SCOTUS anyway, but it would be nice to have some relief until then. Especially for those waiting to see which direction the wind is blowing before deciding how to proceed within the remaining 60 days-ish.

Fortunately, there are other cases still pending in other courts (and states).

 

[wired]

There are others pending but this does set some precedent

 

[Yarome]

There are others pending but this does set some precedent

I dunno. It's an injunction petition hearing opinion... not binding precedence that has bearing over any other court or jurisdiction... but "precedent" in the sense of a "how to" guide to badly and bolding misinterpret law as a blue print for other corrupt justices... I can see that.

I bet there is going to be some fallout for him on his decision. A few Texans probably still remember when it was common practice to lynch a corrupt judge behind the courthouse after hours.

 

[The Heretic]

What is necessary is two different federal district courts issuing disparate and conflicting rulings. At that point the SCOTUS has incentive to resolve the disparity so that the law is consistent and congruent.

 

[Yarome]

What is necessary is two different federal district courts issuing disparate and conflicting rulings. At that point the SCOTUS has incentive to resolve the disparity so that the law is consistent and congruent.

Yeah. It's not all bad news.. and that judge has been a strong supporter of the 2A in the other cases (80%'s, bump stocks, etc.), but I guess my take-away from it was that "while the case may prevail in summary judgement"... what was presented to him by the plaintiffs wasn't enough ammo to meet the standards for the "extraordinary measure" of an injunction... at this point.

Best hope would be some relief through another court and subsequent harder push toward SCOTUS's desk. There's no nail in the coffin until it get's there, anyway.

 

[CamoDeafie]

What is necessary is two different federal district courts issuing disparate and conflicting rulings. At that point the SCOTUS has incentive to resolve the disparity so that the law is consistent and congruent.

If the issue is the "rule" that has the criminal penalties like a law, but was not passed by Congress?

 

[JustSomeGuy]

If the issue is the "rule" that has the criminal penalties like a law, but was not passed by Congress?

As I see it, the issue is an enforcement agency changing the definitions contained within a law. If that's allowed to stand, the "rule of law" can be anything an unelected bureaucrat wants it to be.

 

[wired]

As I see it, the issue is an enforcement agency changing the definitions contained within a law. If that's allowed to stand, the "rule of law" can be anything an unelected bureaucrat wants it to be.

You mean when the ATF illegally changed the definition of buttstock to allow an extralegal category of brace?

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

You mean when the ATF illegally changed the definition of buttstock to allow an extralegal category of brace?

 

[JustSomeGuy]

That's a rabbit hole I won't be exploring with you , or anyone else, this evening. Too deep and dark and brings to mind something about the chicken or the egg.

 

[Yarome]

View attachment 1394360

Only if you agree that any new firearm accessory capable of being attached to a buffer tube, regardless of it's function, is by default definition a buttstock. Like a collar arm? A sling mount clamp? Picatinny tube adapter?

There was no changing of the definition of an existing part and it was within their authority to review and classify a new buffer tube accessory of unique design. Nothing was "changed" to reclassify anything.

Just like a car is a car and a truck is a truck. You can't suddenly decide a car is now a truck just because you want the additional mfg regulations/requirements placed on trucks to apply to cars too... then arrest everyone that currently owns a car that isn't in compliance with the truck regulations. Looking at it like that... it seems pretty rediculous... doesn't it.

Regardless... it just amazes me folks participating in a 2A forum that attempt to justify gooberment controls and support and argue for more infringments.

 

[wired]

It's all about Due Process. Even the ATF has to follow the law.

Look, a shovel.Not designed to be a buttstock, right?

 

[Howard1955]

It's all about Due Process. Even the ATF has to follow the law.

Look, a shovel.Not designed to be a buttstock, right?

View attachment 1394364

 

[MichaelH]

What is necessary is two different federal district courts issuing disparate and conflicting rulings. At that point the SCOTUS has incentive to resolve the disparity so that the law is consistent and congruent.

The Supremes can grant a Petition for Certori without a circuit split.

 

[The Heretic]

The Supremes can grant a Petition for Certori without a circuit split.

Yes, but they are more likely to do that if there is a split

 

[ma96782]

Join the lawsuit and get your name on that list.



Aloha, Mark

 

[Yarome]

11/08 - Texas District Court stays the pistol brace rule in it's entirety... nationwide!

https://will-law.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/177116400067.pdf

Some great reading and quite comprehensive ruling. Not that the goobs won't trip over themselves whining to have it overturned, but some of the arguments are going to make it pretty tough!

* Just a reminder that the GOA, FPC, SAF members injunction is still active.

Noice!!!

 

[ilikegunspdx]

11/08 - Texas District Court stays the pistol brace rule in it's entirety... nationwide!

https://will-law.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/11/177116400067.pdf

Some great reading and quite comprehensive ruling. Not that the goobs won't trip over themselves whining to have it overturned, but some of the arguments are going to make it pretty tough!

* Just a reminder that the GOA, FPC, SAF members injunction is still active.

Noice!!!

Great news! Do you know where is the part that says it's nationwide? I skimmed it and didn't see that. Maybe it's in another parties interpretation? Or I may have just missed it. Or it could be in the earlier court cases of the same case?

I see that one of the arguments by the judgeis the cost of marking the firearm under the rule. I think according to the written rule it does say that but in implementation of the rule atf eleiminated the marking. It's a minor thing and only one of the factors the judge used for irreparable harm. But something the defendants may use on appeal in the future. Just one of the many factors that makes the rule so confusing that lawyers and judges can't figure out what is legal, much less the common citizen. Cant be fair to send someone to jail for 10 years when no one can figure out their conflicting and nubelous rules. Whole thing needs to be thrown out in its entirety ASAP!