Supreme court guts one of the alphabet agency's reach, others to follow? AFT?

[RobMa]

How do you think this decision will affect the other alphabet agencies that rule over us, specifically the AFT?

Supreme Court Shackles EPA’s Authority To Regulate Greenhouse Gas Emissions From Power Plants

Supreme Court limits EPA authority to set climate standards for power plants

The Supreme Court ruled that Congress, not the EPA has authority to set standards on climate-changing greenhouse gas emissions for existing power plants.

www.cnbc.com

Supreme Court restricts the EPA's authority to mandate carbon emissions reductions

The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 6-3 decision, ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency does not have the authority to mandate carbon emissions from existing power plants.

www.npr.org

Forgive the sources that I have sited....

Please don't k_ill the messenger...

Read More

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

My guess is that the ATF will try to ignore it as long as they can even to the point of pushing for a new court case on how they are somehow unique and the ruling doesn't apply to them

 

[Member 3687]

I feel it could have good effects for us and bad effects for the ATF.

This includes bump stocks, frames-receivers and Arm braces all of witch are their new definitions of laws. Some of them have been place since 1934 that were pretty well defined until they recently changed them.

Will they bow down to the rulings, my answer is no, so we will see them in court. The fight is not over but it at least it gives us a better foot hold in my mind,

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

And don't forget the Form 1 suppressor 'rulings' than decided solid cups that could not be attached or held to the firearm by themselves or could even allow a bullet to pass through are by themselves "suppressors"

 

[Flopsweat]

Forgive the sources that I have sited....

Here's one from the other side of the aisle:

US Supreme Court limits government powers to curb greenhouse gases - Breitbart

The US Supreme Court ruled Thursday that the government's key environmental agency cannot issue broad limits on greenhouse gases, sharply curtailing the

www.breitbart.com

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

And what about the shotguns, I'm on mobile but I'm too lazy to look them up I think it was the French SPAS and the South African Street Sweeper, that they just declared destructive devices.
I wonder if that will stand up now

 

[dinky450]

My guess since we have only seen 1 ruling from the higher court in 10 years. I would imagine ATF won't let up to past the left agenda. Hopefully the courts are paying attention since the recent rules are fresh they smack ATF in the pee pee.

 

[titsonritz]

All these turds need to be reeled in. The next president should dissolve the AFT and all of their "rules", hand that stack to congress and have them do it right or they are gone.

 

[Stomper]

And don't forget the Form 1 suppressor 'rulings' than decided solid cups that could not be attached or held to the firearm by themselves or could even allow a bullet to pass through are by themselves "suppressors"

That is because they not only want a $200 NFA stamp per device from the end-user, they want that sweet, sweet revenue from the SOT per manufactured device which they don't get from DIY Form-1's.

 

[po18guy]

So, pack the court and make the US a progressive paradise, just like urban (name the city).

 

[ma96782]

Just remember that.....
"Rules" do NOT ALWAYS equal "Law".

YES.....there is a distinction between them (and who can make/enforce them and to what degree).

Aloha, Mark

 

[Member 3687]

 

[RobMa]

 

[CamoDeafie]

Just remember that.....
"Rules" do NOT ALWAYS equal "Law".

YES.....there is a distinction between them (and who can make/enforce them and to what degree).

Aloha, Mark

This is a good point. However... the 1934 NFA, and the 1968 GCA both have legal definitions for firearms in general... and in the case of NFA firearms, definitions that are clear... but the ATF's "proposed rulemaking changes" with regards to braced AR pistols seem to expand the Legal Definitions of what constitutes AOW, SBRs, or SBS.

 

[Diamondback]

You wanna drive a stake in ATF's kiddie-torching puppy-stomping evil black heart once and for all? Find a suit to challenge the Sporting Purposes Clause of GCA68. FPC and SAF are spoiling for the next big fight, and if we cut out that heart we slay the beast.

It really is that simple... we just need a way to get a case with standing.

 

[ilikegunspdx]

And what about the shotguns, I'm on mobile but I'm too lazy to look them up I think it was the French SPAS and the South African Street Sweeper, that they just declared destructive devices.
I wonder if that will stand up now

I've always wondered about those too. "We don't like the name/look therefore we will specifically ban them." Makes no logical sense at all.

Same way for the browning high power models that are specifically allowed to use a shoulder stock. If you have a slightly different version of the high power than the one specifically identified then a stock is illegal. Makes zero sense and sounds like political lobbying by certain companies to allow their products and exclude competitors products.

 

[Member 3687]

The question I now have with these new rulings is did congress have the right to define or re-define the second amendment to put restrictions on it that did not exist at the time of the founding in the form of the 1934 and 1968 gun acts.

As the 2nd does state Shall not be infringed.

To change or alter an amendment there is a amendment process to fallow and they did not do it in implementing these laws.

Asking for a friend! incase anybody listening!

 

[VinnieBoomBah]

You wanna drive a stake in ATF's kiddie-torching puppy-stomping evil black heart once and for all? Find a suit to challenge the Sporting Purposes Clause of GCA68. FPC and SAF are spoiling for the next big fight, and if we cut out that heart we slay the beast.

It really is that simple... we just need a way to get a case with standing.

I think the best pathway there is for an importer to be the plaintiff. As I understand the sporting purpose clause it also affects importers and they can't bring in things like pistols that don't have target sites or are slightly too tiny or things like that

 

[Ura-Ki]

Sporting Clause hits at the Semi Auto Rifles and Shotguns, and their limited ( By the AFT) capacity, shotgats 3 rounds, rifles, 5 rounds! It forces manufactures to modify or redesign their weapons to "Comply" with the AFT's rules! Cannot hunt with your AR-10 with more then 5 rounds in AFT/State adopted compliant mags! You would have to prove a hardship, or other unreasonable compliance issues! That said, it's quite possible, your FN Browning BAR was modified away from it's original design to be compliant! All your SAKO/Tikka arms were modified to accept certain regularity features outside their original designs!
Here's another biggy, and could be used, any rifle with a threaded muzzle has been neutered by the AFT/NFA restricting the use of suppressors, where in Europe where some of these rifles are imported by FN or Beretta which are fully compliant there and often times, required to have a suppressor to hunt! JMO

 

[Diamondback]

An FFL buddy thinks we might be able to bootstrap Sporter Clause into a suit challenging the Brace rules whenever they drop.