Second Amendment Must be Safeguarded Against Overreach

Hearing Wrap Up: Second Amendment Must be Safeguarded Against Overreach

House Oversight Committee | May 14th, 2026

WASHINGTON—Today, the Subcommittee on Federal Law Enforcement held a hearing on “Privacy Protections & the Second Amendment: Examining ATF’s Relationship to the Tiahrt Amendment” During the hearing, members discussed the history and purpose of the Tiahrt Amendment and the consequences of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ prior failures to abide by it. The hearing also examined the ATF’s track record protecting Second Amendment rights.

Key Takeaways:

ATF has been working to rebuild trust after having a long history of failing to consistently uphold the Second Amendment and Americans’ liberties.

Robert Cekada, Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, testified that “[Effective] law enforcement and respect for civil liberties are inseparable obligations, and that is why ATF has entered a new era of reform to rebuild trust with the industry, the federal firearms licensees, lawful gun owners and the public while still prioritizing our efforts on public safety. Some of the specific actions I have taken include establishing a senior industry partnership advisor position to address industry concerns and foster proactive engagement with the regulated community, revoking the enhanced regulatory enforcement policy, sometimes referred to as a zero tolerance policy, and replacing it with a new policy that emphasizes fairness and transparency while recognizing that FFLs are often the first line of defense against gun crime. And I also implemented regulations reforms last month, where ATF issued 34 notices of final and proposed rulemaking following the comprehensive review that was conducted in compliance with the executive order on protecting the second amendment rights, the aim is simpler, clearer regulations that do not compromise public safety.”

In recent years, ATF has violated the Tiahrt Amendment – which prevents ATF from sharing firearms trace data – by releasing protected data as part of Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) disclosures.

Subcommittee on Federal Law Enforcement Chairman Clay Higgins (R-La.) noted in his opening statement that “Despite Tiahrt’s obvious importance to police and public safety, recent history has shown that ATF has flagrantly disregarded the law. Some violations of Tiahrt have seemed unintentional, associated with accidental data disclosures while responding to FOIA requests. However, other violations clearly stem from the political and ideological opposition some ATF unelected bureaucrats have for the law. There are several glaring recent examples, particularly during the Biden Administration. To begin, the Biden ATF assisted gun control groups in creating a map of gun shops, including those owned by Members of Congress, by providing Tiahrt-protected data as part of a FOIA request. ATF’s release of this data was a clear violation of federal law and intended to help anti-Second Amendment groups.”
ATF under the Biden Administration undermined the Tiahrt Amendment by assisting gun control groups in creating a map of gun shops using trace data.
ATF also inadvertently released Tiahrt-protected data as part of an unrelated 2022 FOIA request.
Congress must examine ways to rein in ATF’s erroneous and inconsistent application of law to prevent infringement of the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms and to ensure safety, privacy, and fairness for all Americans.

Continue reading “”

Trump OCC Gives Customers New Tools to Hold Banks Accountable for Anti-Gun Discrimination.

By Larry Keane

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency is giving bank customers, including firearm industry members, a clearer path to document politicized de-banking and enter those concerns into the regulatory record. The move is a welcome development to further implement President Donald Trump’s Executive Order 14331, “Guaranteeing Fair Banking for All Americans,” and marks another needed step toward ending the practice of denying lawful businesses access to essential financial services because “woke” banks disfavor the firearm industry.

NSSF has long reported on banks using vague “reputational risk” excuses and woke boardroom gun control policies to choke off access to accounts, loans, credit, payment processing and other essential financial services. That discrimination hit lawful, highly regulated businesses whose only offense was serving Americans who choose to exercise their Second Amendment rights.

President Trump’s order states banking decisions must be based on individualized, objective and risk-based analysis, not politics, ideology or hostility toward lawful business activity. The order specifically cited the former Obama administration-era Operation Choke Point as a “well-documented and systemic” effort by federal regulators to pressure banks away from serving lawful industries that are disfavored by the political left…like the firearm industry.

That insidious practice was discontinued under President Trump’s first term but returned anew in a privatized form under former President Joe Biden.

The OCC’s new public comment guidance, however, gives President Trump’s executive order practical force. The agency says bank customers and stakeholders can share de-banking experiences with the OCC and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and those complaints may be considered when the agency reviews bank licensing filings. They may also be considered during Community Reinvestment Act examinations.

Continue reading “”

ATF Align Group

21F: Conforming Change for Approving a Making Application – FINAL RULE

ATF is issuing a final rule to formally codify in regulation the existing practice of conducting National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) checks as part of the National Firearms Act (NFA) approval process for individuals seeking to make NFA firearms. ATF already conducts these checks as part of its standard processing. This final rule aligns the regulatory text with existing statutory requirements and ATF’s current operational practice, ensuring the regulatory framework accurately reflects how background checks are being administered.

20-03D: Export Control Reform – Conforming References to Department of Commerce – FINAL RULE

ATF is issuing a final rule to make technical and administrative clarifying amendments to its regulations in 27 CFR parts 447 and 479, which control the import and export of firearms, ammunition, and defense articles under the Arms Export Control Act. These changes correspond to regulatory changes previously made by the departments of Commerce and State. The rule adds references to reflect that certain transactions now fall under Commerce’s export and temporary import jurisdiction. These changes respond to actions by the departments of Commerce and State to divide export and temporary import controls between those agencies. The rule also makes minor technical amendments for clarity. No substantive policy changes are made.

04P: Update to Proscribed Countries for Import Restrictions – NPRM

ATF is proposing to update the import restrictions applicable to certain countries under the Arms Export Control Act (AECA). The proposed rule would remove the existing, static list of proscribed countries from which ATF denies applications to permanently import defense articles and services, replacing it with a dynamic reference to the Department of State’s list of proscribed countries. This ensures ATF’s import restrictions remain current and consistent with State Department designations without requiring separate ATF rulemaking each time the list changes. The rule also proposes to remove the list of former Soviet countries from which ATF currently denies applications to permanently import most firearms and ammunition, retaining only the Russian Federation as a proscribed country of origin for these imports.

39P: Adding Component Definitions Under the Arms Export Control Act – NPRM

ATF is proposing to amend the language in its specialized subset of regulations under the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) to align with Department of State terminology already in use in the United States Munitions List (USML). By aligning terminology used to describe defense articles, this technical update would reduce ambiguity for Federal Firearms Licensees, Federal Explosives Licensees, and defense industry stakeholders.

2006R-01: Implementing PATRIOT Act Improvements: Contraband Cigarettes and Smokeless – FINAL RULE

ATF is issuing a final rule implementing provisions of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization Act of 2005 related to trafficking in contraband cigarettes and smokeless tobacco. The rule reduces the quantity threshold triggering jurisdiction under the Contraband Cigarette Trafficking Act (CCTA) from more than 60,000 cigarettes to more than 10,000; extends CCTA coverage to contraband smokeless tobacco for the first time; expands recordkeeping requirements and the class of persons subject to them; imposes reporting requirements on persons engaged in delivery sales above specified thresholds; and requires that cigarettes and smokeless tobacco seized and forfeited under the CCTA be used in law enforcement operations or destroyed. The rule does not apply to electronic cigarettes or other vaping products.

45F: Changes to National Firearms Act Tax Remittance Provisions – FINAL RULE 

ATF is issuing a final rule to amend its National Firearms Act (NFA) regulations to reflect changes made by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act to reduce the tax remittance rate for certain NFA firearms. This final rule is necessary to align regulatory text with statutory requirements and implement the legal changes.

ATF Clarify Group

06P: Firearm Activities in Foreign Trade Zones, Customs-Bonded Warehouses – NPRM

ATF is proposing to amend the definition of “importation” in its Gun Control Act (GCA) and National Firearms Act (NFA) regulations to create a parallel exclusion from import requirements for items brought into Customs Bonded Warehouses (CBWs), matching the exclusion that already exists for Foreign Trade Zones (FTZs). The proposal also removes a restriction that currently limits permissible Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL) activities in FTZs and CBWs to storage only, expanding the range of lawful activities FFLs may conduct on items held in these facilities. Together, these changes reduce regulatory ambiguity for importers and licensees operating within international trade environments.

09P: Importing Dual-Use Frames, Receivers, or Barrels – NPRM

ATF is proposing to clarify that Federal Firearms Licensees may lawfully import firearm barrels and frames/receivers capable of being used on both sporting and non-sporting firearms provided that an identified sporting configuration for the barrel or frame/receiver exists at the time of importation. The proposed rule also clarifies that once lawfully imported, a dual-use barrel or frame/receiver may be incorporated into the assembly of a sporting, non-sporting, or NFA-regulated firearm, subject to compliance with all other applicable federal firearms laws.

10P: Importing Training Rounds – NPRM

ATF is proposing to formally clarify in regulation that ”training rounds” — including inert, marking, or simulated-projectile products used for training purposes — do not meet the statutory definition of “ammunition” under the Gun Control Act (GCA) and are therefore not regulated under the GCA or the Arms Export Control Act provided the round is not for a firearm. This codification provides regulatory certainty for importers, manufacturers, and law enforcement suppliers who produce, acquire, or distribute these products.

16P: Converting Temporary to Permanent Imports for Defense Articles – NPRM

ATF is proposing to create a formal administrative process through which a firearms importer may convert a temporarily imported firearm to permanent import status by submitting an ATF Form 6 application when a temporary import authorization has expired or is otherwise no longer operative. Under current regulations, importers whose temporary import authorization expires must re-export, permanently reimport, or destroy the firearm — options that impose significant cost and logistical burden. The proposed rule fills this regulatory gap with a streamlined conversion pathway while maintaining all applicable import controls.

17P: Allowing Makers to Adopt Certain Markings for National Firearms Act – NPRM

ATF is proposing to allow individuals who make National Firearms Act (NFA) firearms by altering existing firearms to adopt markings already applied by the original manufacturer rather than applying additional, redundant markings. Because the original importer and manufacturer’s serial number and markings are already required by statute and regulation, this proposal eliminates a duplicative regulatory requirement while ensuring NFA marking requirements are satisfied. ATF has previously accommodated this practice through individual variances; this proposed rule codifies that accommodation into regulation to provide consistent, clear guidance across the industry.

23P: Clarifying Delivery to a Common or Contract Carrier When Transporting Firearms – NPRM

ATF is proposing to clarify that, for purposes of the Gun Control Act’s  provisions governing the delivery of firearms and ammunition to common or contract carriers, a person traveling aboard a common or contract carrier while personally maintaining direct control over a firearm or ammunition does not constitute “delivery” of that firearm or ammunition to the carrier. This clarification addresses longstanding regulatory ambiguity regarding the obligations of law-abiding travelers who retain physical possession of a firearm during common carrier travel.

24P: Revising Definitions of “Adjudicated as a Mental Defective” and “Committed to a Mental Institution” – NPRM

ATF is proposing to modernize the regulatory definition of “mental defective” — the term used in the Gun Control Act to identify a category of persons prohibited from possessing firearms — to reflect current medical and legal standards. The proposed rule would refine the term “mental defective,” associating it with “intellectually disabled” and clarify that a person receiving assistance in only one functional area (such as financial management) would not, on that basis alone, be considered prohibited under this definition. The proposal also clarifies existing prohibitions. Specifically, individuals committed to a mental institution resulting from a determination that an individual is a danger to themselves or others or is found not guilty by reason of insanity, properly fall within the definition of “committed to a mental institution,” and not within the definition of “mental defective.”

25P: Clarifying Exceptions to the Brady Act Background Check Requirement – NPRM

ATF is proposing to clarify the regulatory standards that govern when a state-issued firearms permit qualifies as an alternative to a National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) check under the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act. The proposed rule makes targeted regulatory adjustments to require confirmation that the state permit is both valid and unexpired and that the language of the state statute conforms with certain requirements established by Congress. The proposed rule provides clearer guidance for Federal Firearms Licensees operating in states where such permits are recognized.

33P: Selecting Biological Sex on ATF Forms  – NPRM

ATF is proposing to amend its regulations to clarify that, in response to questions about sex on ATF forms, individuals should select their biological sex. This refers to the individual’s immutable biological classification as either male or female and does not include the concept of gender identity. These are clarifying amendments to align ATF’s regulatory forms with the President’s signed Executive Order 14168, Defending Women From Gender Ideology Extremism and Restoring Biological Truth to the Federal Government and do not alter any substantive eligibility criteria.

36P: Definition of Business Premises – NPRM

ATF is proposing to clarify the regulatory definition of ‘business premises’ for Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) to explicitly include properties that adjoin each other or that are adjacent to each other and share a common parking lot, sidewalk, or road. This clarification is intended to resolve regulatory ambiguity for licensees whose operations span multiple adjacent buildings or parcels and to provide a consistent, clear standard for FFL licensing determinations.

41P: Firearms Transactions and Straw Purchases – NPRM

ATF is proposing to amend its regulations to provide greater regulatory clarity around the federal prohibition on straw purchases. A straw purchase effectively hides the identity of the actual purchaser/ultimate recipient of the firearm and circumvents the regulatory requirements for a firearm transfer by forgoing background checks and impeding the ability of law enforcement to trace guns involved in the commission of a crime to the true purchaser/ultimate recipient. The proposed rule is intended to provide clearer guidance for licensees, including which transactions are not considered straw purchases, thereby supporting enforcement efforts against true straw purchases.

47P: Creating a Definition of “Willfully” for Firearms Violations – NPRM

ATF is proposing to formally define the term “willfully” in its implementing regulations as it applies to violations of the Gun Control Act, specifically in the context of ATF’s authority to suspend or revoke a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL) license or impose civil penalties. The proposed definition would implement the standard established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Bryan v. United States, under which a person acts “willfully” when they know their conduct is unlawful, even if unaware of the specific statutory provision being violated.

ATF Reduce Burden Group

03P:  Interstate Transport and Temporary Export of National Firearms Act – NPRM

ATF is proposing to update the administrative process for transporting lawfully registered National Firearms Act (NFA) firearms within the United States. Under the proposal, individuals transporting NFA firearms for short-term purposes (365 days or fewer) would no longer be required to submit advance notice to ATF or await approval before departing. Individuals transporting NFA firearms for long-term purposes (more than 365 days) or permanent relocation would still submit notice but would not need to await ATF approval before transporting. This change to ATF Form 5320.20 (Form 20), per 27 CFR § 478.28, is intended to remove an unnecessary regulatory burden on law-abiding NFA firearm owners without affecting applicable federal, state, or local legal requirements.

13P: Joint Registration for Spouses under the National Firearms Act – NPRM

ATF is proposing to allow married couples to file a joint application as makers and/or transferees of NFA-regulated firearms. Under current regulations, spouses who wish to jointly possess an NFA firearm typically establish a legal trust to do so, a process that involves legal expense and administrative complexity. This proposal would allow both spouses to be registered jointly as possessors without creating a trust. Under a joint registration, the transfer of a firearm between spouses would not constitute a separate NFA transfer, reducing both administrative burden and cost for law-abiding NFA firearm owners.

15P: Removing CLEO Notification Under the National Firearms Act – NPRM

ATF is proposing to remove the requirement for an applicant to forward to the Chief Law Enforcement Officer (CLEO) of his or her locality a copy of their National Firearms Act (NFA) application to make or transfer a firearm as well as a copy of the Responsible Person Questionnaire (ATF Form 5320.23) required to be completed. The requirement to forward these documents to CLEOs has faced sustained legal challenges and has not achieved its intended public safety outcomes.

18P: Clarifying Interstate Transportation of Firearms under the Gun Control Act – NPRM

ATF is proposing to clarify regulations that govern the interstate transportation of firearms by lawful owners. The proposed rule formally recognizes that common, reasonably necessary activities during travel – including overnight stops, vehicle maintenance, refueling, emergency stops, and medical treatments – are considered as a necessary part of “transport,” and are therefore covered under the Firearms Owners’ Protection Act’s interstate transport protections. The proposed rule also updates requirements for transporting ammunition and firearm accessories and clarifies requirements for securing firearms during transit.

19P: Transferring Machine Guns Between Qualified Licensees – NPRM

ATF is proposing to simplify regulatory requirements for machine gun transfers between licensed manufacturers, importers, and dealers in two specific, limited circumstances: 1) when demonstrating firearms to government entities, and 2) when a licensee is discontinuing a business. The proposed changes update implementing regulations to more closely align with the authority provided by the Gun Control Act and ATF parameters established in a January 2023 Open Letter to prevent misuse of the dealer sales sample exception. This reduces unnecessary regulatory complexity for these narrow commercial transactions while maintaining all applicable NFA requirements and federal licensing controls.

20P: Clarifying Special (Occupational) Tax Payments Per Business Activity – NPRM

ATF is proposing to clarify that Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) who pay the Special Occupational Taxpayer (SOT) fee under the National Firearms Act (NFA) owe one SOT per business activity (manufacturing, importing, or dealing) conducted at a given location, regardless of the number of Gun Control Act (GCA) licenses the FFL holds to carry out such activity at that location. This is a regulatory clarification designed to provide licensees with a clear, consistent understanding of their NFA tax obligation.

38F: Removing Triplicate Filing Requirement for Importing Plastic Explosives – FINAL RULE

ATF is amending its regulations governing the importation of plastic explosives to remove the requirement that importers submit the required attestation in triplicate when filing a Form 6 import application. ATF’s current processing procedures do not require three copies of this document, making the triplicate requirement an administrative artifact with no current operational function. This change eliminates redundant paperwork without affecting any substantive requirement governing the importation of plastic explosives.

ATF Modernize Group

01P: Revising Firearms Transaction Record, “Form 4473” – NPRM

ATF is proposing comprehensive updates to ATF Form 4473 (the Firearms Transaction Record required for all commercial firearms transfers) and its implementing regulations. The proposed rule would streamline identity and residency verification requirements for transferees; increase the time period for which a National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) background check remains valid; clarify exceptions to background checks; permit electronic notice; and authorize the use of electronic forms, auto-population, and digital record attachments. The proposed rule would also incorporate ATF rulings and other guidance to align regulations with their authorizing statutory text as well as make minor technical revisions. These updates reflect modern business practices and are intended to reduce administrative burden on law-abiding citizens and businesses, while maintaining robust safeguards against unlawful transfers.

07P: Firearms Electronic Record-keeping – NPRM

ATF is proposing to formally authorize Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) to generate, maintain, and store required records, including ATF Form 4473 and Acquisition and Disposition (A&D) records, using electronic record-keeping systems. ATF has already permitted this practice for many licensees through blanket and individual variance authorizations. This proposal codifies that authority into regulation, standardizing electronic recordkeeping across the industry, reducing the paperwork burden on licensees, and enhancing ATF’s ability to support timely firearm tracing and investigative efforts.

08P: Firearm Records Retention Periods – NPRM

ATF is proposing to replace the current practice of indefinite retention of Federal Firearms Licensees (FFL) records with definite retention periods for ATF Forms 4473 and Acquisition and Disposition (A&D) records. ATF is considering retention periods of either 20 or 30 years and is requesting public comment on the appropriate timeframe for certain records. ATF also proposes a 20 or 30 year retention period would be required for ATF’s Out-of-Business Records Center at the National Tracing Center. The proposal introduces a 90-day retention period for records related to private-party transfers and voluntary firearm handler checks. Additionally, the proposal includes a five-year retention period for multiple sales reports, pistols and revolvers (ATF Form 3310.4), theft loss reports (ATF Form 3310.11), and Forms 4473 where the transaction is initiated but not completed. This update reflects standard federal records management principles and provides regulatory clarity for licensees.

32D: Licensee “eZ Check” Verification for Transfers – DIRECT FINAL RULE

ATF is issuing a direct final rule to allow Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) transferring firearms to other FFLs to verify the transferee’s license using ATF’s publicly available ‘FFL eZ Check’ online system rather than requiring the transferor to obtain a certified paper copy of the transferee’s license. The rule also removes an outdated and now unnecessary ‘grace period’ provision that previously allowed transferors to continue to sell or transfer firearms to an FFL listed on a certified list from multi-licensed organizations for up to 45 days after the expiration date of that licensee’s specific license.

26P: Revising Non-Over-the-Counter Firearms Transaction Requirements – NPRM

ATF is proposing to amend regulations to authorize “Non-Over-the-Counter” (NOTC) firearm sales by Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) to residents of the same state. The proposed rule would allow FFLs to comply with the requirements of NOTC transactions originally implemented by the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the requirements of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act of 1994 more efficiently to include identification verification. This update is based on the recognition of increased options to securely verify photo identification of prospective purchasers, thereby providing greater flexibility while maintaining the rigorous identification verification and background checks required by the Brady Act.

ATF Repeal Group

ATF is proposing to formally rescind regulatory changes made in 2023 regarding firearms equipped with stabilizing braces. Multiple federal courts have found that the 2023 rule – as codified in 27 CFR 478.11 and 479.11 – violated the Administrative Procedure Act, and the rule has been enjoined, stayed, or vacated across numerous jurisdictions. This proposal removes regulatory language that has been largely unenforceable, restoring the regulatory definitions to be consistent with the underlying statutory definitions.

27P: Revising Regs Defining “Engaged in the Business” as a Dealer in Firearms – NPRM

ATF is revising regulatory changes it made to the definition of the ‘engaged in the business’ of dealing in firearms. The rule rescinds certain provisions of the definition of ‘engaged in the business.’ The rescinded changes have not produced the anticipated outcomes in terms of Federal Firearms License applications, administrative licensing actions, civil forfeitures, or other anticipated enforcement metrics. The rule retains the definition of ‘engaged in the business’ as specifically revised and codified by Congress in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA), ensuring that ATF’s regulatory definitions reflect the statutory language Congress enacted.

2024-01F: Revising Machine Gun Definition in Response to Supreme Court Decision – FINAL RULE

ATF is removing two sentences from its three regulatory definitions of “machine gun” that previously incorporated bump stocks into those definitions. This action responds directly to the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Garland v. Cargill (2024), which held that semiautomatic rifles equipped with bump stocks do not satisfy the statutory definition of “machine gun” under the National Firearms Act. This rescission aligns ATF’s regulatory text with the statute and the Court’s binding legal interpretation.

28P: Removing Youth Handgun Safety Act Notice – NPRM

ATF is proposing to rescind 27 CFR § 478.103 to remove the requirement for Federal Firearms Licensees (FFLs) to post a sign (ATF I 5300.1) and provide a written notification (ATF I 5300.2) to each handgun purchaser regarding the Youth Handgun Safety Act. This 1998 regulation was established to inform purchasers of the 1994 Youth Handgun Safety Act. The proposed recission reduces an unnecessary burden on FFLs to inform purchasers about a law that has been in place for over 30 years and is now readily accessible.

ATF’s New Era of Reform

ATF launched a new era of reform in 2025 focused on a commitment to transparency, accountability, and partnership with the firearms industry, gun owners, and the public. Under new leadership, the agency has fundamentally changed course, moving toward a model built on trust and collaboration. This means working with federal firearms and explosives licensees as partners, reducing unnecessary burdens on law-abiding businesses and citizens, and ensuring ATF’s actions are grounded in clear statutory authority and focused on protecting American communities from violent crime driven by explosives, arson, and the illegal use of firearms.

Proposed Rulemakings

As part of ATF’s commitment, the agency recently published a landmark package of proposed rules representing the most significant modernization of ATF regulations in the agency’s history. These proposed rules take a common-sense approach to modernizing regulations and forms and reducing burden on law-abiding businesses and citizens alike. Public comments are encouraged during the open comment period for each rule.

34 Notices to be signed on April 29, 2026

New Era Actions Taken

  • Published a landmark package of proposed rules to streamline regulations and forms, reducing burden on dealers and gun owners alike.
  • Ended the Enhanced Regulatory Enforcement Policy that had targeted firearms dealers; FFLs whose licenses were revoked or surrendered under that policy may reapply under the new Administrative Action Policy.
  • Published a new Administrative Action Policy emphasizing firearm traceability and public safety while deemphasizing immaterial paperwork errors.
  • Revised processes for determining what inspection and compliance data is published.
  • Instituted a NICS alert policy restricting use of NICS alerts to federal firearms trafficking violations.
  • Established a Senior Industry Partnership Advisor/Liaison to address industry concerns and foster productive engagement.
  • Established a classifications board requiring all new firearm classifications to be reviewed and approved by the Office of the Director prior to publication.
  • Improved response time from the Firearms & Ammunition Technology Division (FATD) to FFL inquiries.
  • Reversed bans on the importation of non-lethal training ammunition and dual-use barrels.

What’s Next

This is an ongoing effort. ATF is committed to continued modernization and welcomes public input on proposed rules or outreach to our Senior Industry Partnership Advisor/Liaison.

DOJ and ATF Announce Regulatory Reforms to Reduce Burdens on Law-Abiding Gun Owners and Businesses

WASHINGTON — The Department of Justice (DOJ) and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) is releasing this week 34 notices of final and proposed rulemaking following a comprehensive review of existing regulations conducted in compliance with Executive Order 14206, Protecting Second Amendment Rights. Consistent with ATF’s commitment in 2025 to rebuild trust with Federal Firearms and Explosives Licensees (FFLs/FELs) and industry stakeholders, this review included a consideration of industry and expert feedback and concerns. This landmark release is the first in a series of regulatory updates ATF plans to issue.

The resulting rules are an effort to reduce unnecessary burdens on law-abiding citizens and businesses while modernizing regulatory frameworks that no longer reflect current law, agency practice, or court precedent. The aim is simpler, clearer regulations that do not compromise ATF’s ability to perform its critical missions to protect American communities from violent crime.

“The Second Amendment is not a second-class right,” said U.S. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche. “This Department of Justice is ending the weaponization of federal authority against law-abiding gun owners. We will continue to vigorously defend their rights as the Constitution demands.”

Robert Cekada, who was recently confirmed by the U.S. Senate as ATF Director, said “ATF’s mission is to protect public safety and enforce the law – and these reforms reflect our commitment to doing that through regulations that are clear, legally sound, and narrowly tailored to that purpose.” He added, “Our enforcement focus from here on out is on willful violators and criminal actors, not inadvertent compliance issues by responsible owners and licensees.”

Summaries of the rules are available on atf.gov. ATF encourages broad public participation in its regulatory process and invites input on the proposed changes. The agency is committed to reviewing input in a timely manner and ensuring consideration of significant feedback into the final rules.

Clear instructions for submitting comments may be found via the Federal eRulemaking Portal at Regulations.gov and in each NPRM. The comment periods will generally be open for 90 days from the date of publication, but may vary. Please pay attention to the “DATES” section in each proposal for details.

Acting AG Todd Blanche Rejects ‘More Restrictive’ Gun Laws as Response to WHCD Attack

Acting AG Todd Blanche Rejects ‘More Restrictive’ Gun Laws as Response to WHCD Attack
During a Sunday morning appearance on CBS News’ Face the Nation, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche made clear the push for “more restrictive” gun laws is the wrong response to the White House Correspondents’ Dinner (WHCD) attack.

Host Margaret Brennan noted that alleged WHCD attacker traveled from California to Washington, DC via a train and asked if there are plans to change “security protocols” to “match on trains what you are expected to go through when you fly, when you do have to declare a weapon”?

Blanche responded, “This isn’t about… changing the law and making the laws more restrictive around possession of firearms. It appears he purchased these firearms the past couple of years. We don’t know how those firearms ended up in his possession in D.C. We can make some assumptions based upon what I just said about he got to D.C., but I don’t think the narrative here is about changing laws or making our laws more restrictive.”

Brennan said, “If you try to fly you do have to have your firearms declared in some way, you don’t when you get on a train.”

Consider this: Amtrak’s weapons policy statement is actually more stringent than that of an airline. It not only requires checked firearms to be placed in a “locked hard-sided container…” but also mandates that the passenger alert Amtrak of the intent to check guns 24 hours before departure.

NSSF Commends Indiana Gov. Mike Braun for Protecting Firearm Retailers, Ranges from Zoning Discrimination

NSSF®, The Firearm Industry Trade Association, commends Indiana Gov. Mike Braun for signing a law prohibiting local governments from weaponizing zoning regulations to prevent firearm retailers and ranges from operating in areas already approved for commercial use. The NSSF-priority bill, Indiana’s Senate Enrolled Act (SEA) 176, was signed by Gov. Braun earlier this year and a ceremonial signing is scheduled for late April. The bill was led by State Sen. Jim Tomes and State Rep. Ben Smaltz.

“The passage of Senate Enrolled Act 176 into law is a vital step to ensuring that law-abiding gun owners have access to safe and state-of-the-art shooting ranges and firearm retail locations,” explained Chris Lee, NSSF’s Director of Government Relations – State Affairs. “This law will safeguard ranges and retailers from antigun agenda-driven weaponization of local zoning authorities. These establishments, which are necessary to the exercise of Second Amendment rights, are too often relegated to back corners of industrial parks and country roads that are inconvenient to access for most consumers, including hunters and law enforcement. NSSF is grateful to the Indiana legislature and Governor Braun for ensuring these ranges and retailers are protected so Hoosiers can safely and lawfully exercise their Second Amendment rights.”

Continue reading “”

Machine Guns in “Common Use”: A realistic strategy

I have some good news and some bad news. The bad news is that the United States Supreme Court is not going to hold that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear machine guns. The justices made this clear in Garland v. Cargil (2024).

In the District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) oral argument, the attorney representing the District of Columbia correctly argued that machine guns are arms protected by the Second Amendment. It was Justice Scalia who pushed back. In the view of the late justice, only arms that are in “common use” are arms protected by the Second Amendment.

The good news is that there is a strategy to bypass the 1986 de facto Federal ban on civilians acquiring machine guns, which would result in their becoming “in common use.”1

But we won’t be able to rely on the courts. We will have to come up with a political solution that will withstand the inevitable legal challenges.

In February, Senate Bill 1071 was filed in West Virginia. Reportedly, “A West Virginia lobbyist working for WVCDL threatened to kill the bill over the weekend in a verbal exchange in front of multiple lawmakers. The lobbyist threatened to kill the bill in other states as well, including Kentucky.” In any event, the bill died.

There were two problems with the bill. The first problem was that the bill relied exclusively on 18 U.S.C. § 922(o)(2)(A), a Federal law that exempts “a transfer to or by, or possession by or under the authority of, the United States or any department or agency thereof or a State, or a department, agency, or political subdivision thereof…”

That argument failed recently in the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in U.S. v. Kittson. You can read the decision as well as Judge Van Dyke’s dissent below.

U.S. v. Kittson 23-4132
433KB ∙ PDF file

Download

The second problem is that West Virginia is in the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. A Circuit that has long vied with the 9th and 2nd Circuits for being the most anti-gun circuit.

The correct strategy is to rely on the Militia Clause of the Second Amendment.

District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) held that the Second Amendment protects the individual right to keep and bear arms, independent of service in a militia. All of the Second Amendment cert petitions granted since then have likewise been cases unrelated to the Militia Clause.

Instead of using the state to transfer machine guns to basically anyone via a Federal statute, one the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals has already held only applies to “government personnel,”2 simply make the transfers to members of the state militia or similar state organization, and do it first in a Circuit, such as the Fifth Circuit, where any legal challenge would face an uphill battle.

The Texas State Guard is such an organization. Unlike the National Guard, members of the Texas State Guard report only to the governor.

Members of the Texas State Guard (TXSG) are required to attend monthly drill weekends, four days of Annual Training, and emergency State Active Duty deployments when ordered.

That is an important element to defending against any legal challenge. A state that simply said every able-bodied adult who is a citizen of the state of Texas and who is between such and such an age is a member of the State militia would be hard pressed to defend its passing out or selling machine guns to the general public.

Were it up to me, machine guns would be as easy to purchase as firing reproductions of Revolutionary War muskets. But it is not up to me.

Around half of the states are “Red States,” with a combined population of about 150 million. If you want machine guns to become “in common use,” then you will have to organize and start lobbying the Red State legislatures to revitalize their state militias, and in those states like Texas, utilize the existing infrastructure.

An Alternative Strategy Recently Appeared

Speaking of Texas, a Federal lawsuit was filed on March 10th in the Northern District of Texas that claims 18 U.S.C. § 922(o) “is unconstitutional on its face and as applied to Plaintiffs because it exceeds Congress’s enumerated powers…” The case is Temple Gun Club, Inc. v. Bondi.

Given the recent Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals decision in McNutt v. Department of Justice et al., which held that the ban on the home distillation of alcohol is unconstitutional, if I were the Plaintiffs in Temple Gun Club, I would file an amended complaint.

DOJ Reverses Course on Defending Biden’s ‘Engaged in the Business’ Rule for Gun Sales

Gun Owners of America is celebrating a win in the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals after the Department of Justice abruptly reversed course in a lawsuit challenging the ATF’s expanded definition of who is “engaged in the business” of dealing firearms that was put into effect under the Biden administration and then-ATF Director Steve Dettelbach.

The rule was explicitly designed to get as close as possible to “universal” background checks without a new law being passed by Congress, and treated the vast majority of private, person-to-person sales as those that should be conducted by a federally licensed firearms dealer. The attorneys general of Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Utah, along with GOA, the Virginia Citizens Defense League, and Tennessee Firearms Association filed a lawsuit to block the law from being enforced, and a district court granted a preliminary injunction barring enforcement against the plaintiffs in June, 2024.

Biden’s DOJ appealed that decision, though, and the Trump administration continued to defend the rule even as officials said that virtually every one of Biden’s executive actions on firearms were in the process of being undone.

On Thursday, however, the DOJ filed a request with the Fifth Circuit to voluntarily dismiss its appeal with the plaintiffs’ consent. In their request, the DOJ’s attorneys said the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives “plans to revisit” the rule and “revis[e] the guidelines for determining who is considered ‘engaged in the business’ of selling firearms.”

The DOJ also informed the court (and the rest ofus) that a notice of proposed rulemaking addressing the “engaged in the business rule” is “forthcoming”, and that in light of the proposed rule on the horizon the government “has determined that it is not appropriate to continue this appeal.”

Continue reading “”

VA Ground Zero on Guns: DOJ Legal Action Threat

By Dave Workman

Editor-in-Chief

In office only four months, Virginia Governor Abigail Spanberger has found herself in the middle of a gun rights battleground, and the fault lies squarely in her lap and with her Democrat colleagues in the legislature for passing a slew of gun control bills, including one which brought a promise of federal legal action: Senate Bill 749.

Spanberger faces a deadline of 11:59 p.m. tonight—one minute before Midnight—to either sign or veto the bill. A third option, as noted by WVEC News, would let the bills become law without her signature.

In a sharply-worded letter to Spanberger, Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon at the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division, which includes the newly-created Second Amendment section, Spanberger was warned the DOJ “will commence litigation in the event the Commonwealth of Virginia enacts certain bills that unconstitutionally limit law-abiding Americans’ individual right to bear arms.” The letter specifically mentioned SB 749, which would “unconstitutionally” restrict the manufacture, purchase or sale of AR-15 rifles “and other semi-automatic firearms in common use.”

This was no idle threat. Dhillon’s Civil Rights Division has already taken legal action against the Virgin Island police and the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department over delays in approving gun permit applications.

Continue reading “”