Category: Government

BLUF
The end result is that Vang is out of the US and Walz exposed as a radical who will put children at risk to score cheap points on immigration. If Walz could have played this worse, someone will have to explain how.

Rubio and DHS Deported Child Molester Walz Tried to Keep In US.

I hate to say I told you so, but … naah, I love to say I told you so. Especially when it comes to kicking child molesters out of the country after Democrat governors attempt to keep them on the streets.

Last month, Tim Walz and his Board of Pardons issued a pardon to Tou Lue Vang, who had been in prison since pleading guilty to repeated sexual assaults on a girl for two years, starting when she was ten years old. The Board of Pardons, as David pointed out last week, consists of Walz, radical AG Keith Ellison, and Walz’ appointed chief justice of the state supreme court. Walz and his panel intended to keep Vang from deportation back to Laos, whence he came to the US illegally, by removing the only conviction on his record.

The Department of Homeland Security called the move “disgusting” at the time:

“Governor Tim Walz’s decision to pardon an illegal alien convicted child rapist so he can remain in our country is disgusting,” said Acting Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis.

 “These are the criminal illegal aliens he and his Minnesota sanctuary politicians are protecting. Tou Lue Vang lost his legal status following his conviction for repeatedly sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl.

Following the conviction, he was placed in removal proceedings and issued a final order of removal by a judge. This pardon will take away this child rapist’s qualifying convictions that made him removable from the United States.”

Well, that was what Walz and Ellison hoped, anyway. They wanted to thumb their nose at DHS, ICE, and Donald Trump by, er … [checks notes] … releasing a child predator onto the streets of Minnesota. As I wrote at the time, that logic appeared to parallel the Labour Party’s decision to allow rape rings to operate for decades rather than run the risk of looking culturally insensitive by booting out the Muslim immigrants running them.

I also wrote that this very weird strategy likely wouldn’t work:

I’m not so sure this will work. A state pardon does not have any real impact on the status of an illegal alien at the federal level. Trump has said he wants to concentrate on criminal illegal aliens, but that doesn’t mean deportation is limited to that class. Furthermore, the government has every right to cite the details of Vang’s crimes as an argument about his fitness to remain in the country. Walz’ pardon does not vindicate Vang, nor does it erase the evidence of his crime, including his own statements admitting to them. And again, a state pardon only has impact on state-level consequences, not federal consequences.

As it turns out, Walz’ pardon did nothing to prevent DHS from kicking Vang out of the country. The agency announced Vang’s deportation in the last hour by e-mail:

The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released the following statement confirming that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) has arrested and deported an illegal alien from Laos who had been pardoned by Minnesota Governor Tim Walz and his fellow sanctuary politicians despite a prior conviction for repeatedly sexually assaulting a 10-year-old girl.

Tou Lue Vang, an illegal alien from Laos, had been convicted in 2006 of first-degree criminal sexual conduct after he repeatedly assaulted a girl between 2002 and 2004, starting when she was just 10 years old. He once offered his victim $10 to keep quiet about the sexual assaults. When interviewed by police, he tried to justify his actions as “a cultural thing,” and even said that his victim was just as guilty as him and should also be arrested.

Following his conviction, a Department of Justice (DOJ) Immigration Judge issued Vang a final order of removal on October 31, 2006. …

“ICE deported Tou Vang, an illegal alien convicted child rapist. This monster repeatedly sexually assaulted a 10-year-old girl,” said Acting Assistant Secretary Lauren Bis. “Tim Walz pardoned this sex criminal in an attempt to allow him to remain in our country. These are the criminal illegal aliens he and sanctuary politicians are protecting. We will always put the safety of the American people first.”

Secretary of State Marco Rubio intervened to strip Vang of a legal status he never should have had in the first place. That allowed DHS to arrest Vang and kick him out of the US, as Rubio explained earlier today on X/Twitter:

What exactly did Walz, Ellison, and Democrats get out of this? They made it clear that they will let sex offenders on the street as a means to frustrate the enforcement of immigration law. At the same time, Walz also demonstrated his own incompetence to game out this situation more than a single step at a time. In fact, Walz may have made Vang more of a target for DHS and the State Department with his ham-handed abuse of the pardon process. Would DHS have made Vang a priority had Walz not turned him into some bizarre, pedophilic cause celebre?

The end result is that Vang is out of the US and Walz exposed as a radical who will put children at risk to score cheap points on immigration. If Walz could have played this worse, someone will have to explain how. 

DeSantis Officially Calls Antifa and CAIR What They Really Are.

It’s a sign of what Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and the rest of us are up against that the Miami area’s PBS station, WLRN, headlined its story about Florida’s new designation of Antifa and the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) as terrorist groups this way: “DeSantis: Florida set to label Muslim civil rights nonprofit a terrorist group under new law.”

The obvious intent of that headline is to give WLRN’s remaining handful of readers, who are no doubt all already hardcore leftists, the impression that DeSantis, drunk on “Islamophobia” and right-wing “hate,” is gratuitously naming an innocent, and indeed, noble, civil rights organization a terrorist group just because it’s non-Christian and presumably full of “brown” people.

In reality, however, CAIR is an unindicted co-conspirator in a Hamas terror funding case — so named by the Justice Department. CAIR officials have repeatedly refused to denounce Hamas and Hizballah as terrorist groups. Several former CAIR officials have been convicted of various crimes related to jihad terror. CAIR’s cofounder and longtime Board chairman (Omar Ahmad), as well as its chief spokesman (Ibrahim Hooper), have made Islamic supremacist statements about how Islamic law should be imposed in the U.S. (Ahmad denies this, but the original reporter stands by her story.)

CAIR has opposed virtually every anti-terror measure that has been proposed or implemented, and the United Arab Emirates has declared it a terror organization. CAIR’s Hussam Ayloush in 2017 called for the overthrow of the U.S. government. CAIR’s national outreach manager in 2019 was an open supporter of Hamas. CAIR top dog Nihad Awad said the October 7 jihad massacre of 1,200 Israelis made him “happy.”

Awad and Omar Ahmad, two officials of the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP), founded this Hamas-linked Muslim Brotherhood group in 1994. The federal government shut down the IAP in 2005 as a Hamas front. Over the years, several CAIR officials have been convicted of participating in violent jihad activities.

Meanwhile, CAIR has exhorted Muslims in the U.S. to refuse to cooperate with law enforcement. In Jan. 2011, it came to light that a CAIR chapter in California had circulated a poster reading “Build a Wall of Resistance” and “Don’t Talk to the FBI.” Cyrus McGoldrick, a former official of CAIR’s New York chapter, even threatened informants, tweeting with brutal succinctness: “Snitches get stitches.” Zahra Billoo of CAIR-San Francisco has declared that Muslims have no obligation to talk to the FBI and should contact CAIR if the FBI asks to talk to them.

Yet despite its connections to the Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas, the terror convictions of several of its former officials, and its virtually unanimous opposition to counter-terror laws, investigations, and other initiatives, CAIR remains widely respected. Nearly everyone (particularly in Washington) assumes that it is exactly what it says it is: a Muslim civil rights organization, working for the rights of Muslims in the U.S. and deeply loyal to Constitutional principles and freedoms. The organization’s website features testimonials from congressmen and senators of both parties, as well as security and military officials, testifying to how the organization has perfected the art of deception.

So great is CAIR’s influence, and presumably Antifa’s as well, that WLRN’s report warned darkly that DeSantis’ move could blow up on the Republicans. Former Florida Panhandle state House Republican Joel Rudman said: “I think that when you give that much authority to an elected, or, in the case of this bill, sometimes non-elected officials, I think that’s very dangerous.”

Related: Arizona School Board Member in Hot Water for… Criticizing Islam

Rudman explained: “Now, my colleagues on the Republican side of the aisle, I’m sure they’re looking at this bill, saying, ‘These statutes. They can’t be warped. They can’t be abused. We have no intention of abusing them.’ But you have to understand that every bill you pass into law, there’s going to have some unintended consequences, and you have to be prepared for how those statutes are going to be interpreted when you’re not the majority party.… I think any constitutional conservative Republicans should have a problem with that bill.”

No one should ever allow himself to be intimidated into refraining from doing something right for fear that someone else will do something wrong in response. Nevertheless, Rudman was essentially predicting that Florida Democrats will, if they gain power, start declaring groups they dislike to be terrorist organizations, and indeed, the left is so morally bankrupt and power-mad at this point that this is a very real possibility.

Nevertheless, regarding CAIR and Antifa, DeSantis is absolutely correct and should stand his ground.

The Supreme Court lets the Trump administration end legal protections for Haitians and Syrians

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court on Thursday allowed the Trump administration to end legal protections for migrants fleeing violence and natural disaster in Haiti and Syria, exposing hundreds of thousands more people to potential deportation.

The 6-3 decision overturns lower court orders and allows the Department of Homeland Security to swiftly end temporary protected status, a program that protects a total of 1.3 million people from 17 countries.

It marked another victory at the high court for Republican President Donald Trump’s sweeping crackdown on immigration. Though the conservative-dominated court has put the brakes on some of Trump’s immigration policies, it handed him a second win Thursday in a decision clearing the way for the revival of a policy restricting immigrants seeking asylum.

The court’s conservative majority found that the law doesn’t allow courts to question the process that immigration authorities use to revoke the protections.

Arizona’s Democrat Governor Signs Range Protection Bill Into Law

Milton Friedman once said that he didn’t believe that the solution to all our political problems is to simply to elect the right people. Instead, he claimed “the important thing is to establish a political climate of opinion which will make it politically profitable for the wrong people to do the right thing.”

For Arizona gun owners, Gov. Katie Hobbs is hardly the right person for the job. She has used her veto power to block numerous pro-2A reforms during her time in office, including campus carry legislation and a measure blocking the use of industry-specific Merchant Category Codes for gun stores this year.

So it’s downright shocking that Hobbs has now signed HB 2763 into law. The bill, authored by State Rep.Quang Nguyen, puts some added protections in place for state-owned shooting ranges like the Ben Avery facility in Phoenix. Under the bill, the range could not be closed or shut down unless such a move receives the approval of the Arizona legislature, not just the the Arizona Game and Fish Commission, which oversees the range’s day-to-day operations.

In a press release, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms chairman Alan Gottlieb praised Nguyen for his work in protecting the world-class facility.

“I can say without fear of contradiction that protecting the Ben Avery shooting range and similar facilities around the Grand Canyon State is of paramount importance to Arizona gun owners,” said CCRKBA Chairman Alan Gottlieb. “Future generations of Arizona hunters, competitors and recreational shooters will benefit from this bill’s passage.

“The Citizens Committee takes this opportunity to congratulate Rep. Nguyen for his tireless efforts to guide HB 2763 through the legislature and finally to the governor’s desk,” he added. “We’re disappointed that not a single Democrat lawmaker in either the House or Senate voted in support of this legislation, while we are proud of Rep. Nguyen and his Republican colleagues, led by House Speaker Steve Montenegro, who passed this important measure despite that partisan opposition.

“It should be noted that Rep. Nguyen has appeared at the Gun Rights Policy Conference, which is co-sponsored by the Citizens Committee, and I am personally grateful for his dedication to Arizona gun owners,” Gottlieb observed. “I have come to know him as a lawmaker who can be counted on to defend the Second Amendment and the rights protected by Article 2, Section 26 of the Arizona constitution, adopted way back in 1912 when Arizona achieved statehood. He can rightfully be proud of this achievement.”

It’s astounding to me that Nguyen’s bill couldn’t get a single Democrat to vote in support. After all, you don’t normally see lawmakers turn down the opportunity to exercise power.

It’s even more amazing that Hobbs signed HB 2763 given its lack of support among Democrats in the legislature.

With a six-seat majority in the state House and a four-seat majority in the state Senate, Republicans are now in a position to thwart any effort by AZ Game and Fish Commission leaders to shutter the shooting complex, at least in the short term. It’s still up to gun owners in Arizona, however, to ensure that the legislature remains as supportive of the Second Amendment as it is right now, and to replace Hobbs this November with a governor who will sign every single pro-2A measure that gets to her desk instead of selectively doing the right thing when it suits her political agenda.

Panic Setting In As Administration Moves to Bolster Americans’ Gun Rights Advance.

In the last 17 months, the Trump administration has delivered win after win for the nation’s most ardent gun-rights advocacy groups, chipping away at dozens of federal regulations. While many of these efforts target regulations from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives — the law enforcement agency within the Justice Department tasked with regulating the nation’s millions of firearms — the administration’s work stretches across the executive branch.

Supporters of tighter gun restrictions have pilloried the Trump administration, saying officials are acting recklessly and could endanger the public with a wholesale rollback of regulations. But gun rights advocates who portrayed the Biden administration as trampling on the Second Amendment have praised the current administration’s actions as a needed corrective.

Trump vowed on the campaign trail to be a pro-Second Amendment president and pledged that, under his leadership, “no one will lay a finger on your firearms.” He said he would roll back Biden-era ATF regulations and received the backing of the big gun rights groups.

Critics, however, have said that the Trump’s administration’s push to unwind gun regulations contradicts the president’s tough-on-crime political agenda. And, they say, the efforts could make it easier for potentially dangerous people to access firearms. …

[ATF general counsel Robert] Leider has been working on the regulations for more than a year. The plan had been to announce them July 4, 2025, at an Independence Day celebration, The Post previously reported.

But [Acting Attorney General Todd] Blanche has said the proposed changes took longer than expected to complete because lawyers had to scrupulously review them to ensure they passed legal muster. Justice Department officials expect them to face court challenges.

Because the Trump administration is making these changes through the regulatory process — and not by legislation passed in Congress and signed into law — the next administration could reinstate the scrapped rules. The goal, Justice Department officials said, is to ensure that the regulations do not run afoul of laws so that they can remain intact.

“We were very careful on how we did the rules,” Leider said. “Congress has decided that certain people cannot be trusted with firearms. ATF has to enforce those congressional judgments. It is not the agency’s job to amend Congress’s criteria in an effort to predict who will become violent.”

— Perry Stein in Inside the Trump administration’s rapid rollback of gun regulations

West Virginia Carry Reforms Improve 2A Rights for Young Adults

When it comes to the right to keep and bear arms, West Virginia is by far the best Virginia. While Democrats in Richmond have imposed more than a dozen anti-gun measures on residents this year, the GOP-dominated legislature in Charleston continues to advance Second Amendment rights. As of last Friday, adults under the age of 21 can now lawfully carry without the need for a permit, making West Virginia a true Constitutional Carry state.

House Bill 4106 sailed through the legislature, passing the House on an 85-8 vote and the Senate 31-3. Still, the legislation had some critics during a public hearing earlier this year.

During a Senate Judiciary Committee meeting in March, Dr. Jim McJunkin said firearms are the leading cause of death for children and adolescents in the United States. He said expanding permitless carry to younger adults creates concerns because of impulsive behavior, risk-taking and the potential for substance abuse.

Supporters of the bill argued that it applies to law-abiding adults and could help people protect themselves.

Art Thomm of the West Virginia Citizens Defense League told lawmakers that similar concerns have been raised during previous debates on the issue, but said the legislation applies to adults who follow the law.

McJunkin’s statistic is only accurate if you ignore every death of a child under the age of 1 and expand the definition of adolescent to include adults 18 and 19-years-old. In fact, as the Washington Post(!) reported last year, traffic fatalities are the leading cause of death for children between the ages of 1 and 15, not firearms.

Does that actually bolster McJunkin’s argument that young adults are too impulsive to exercise their Second Amendment rights? I don’t think so. Less than 1% of the population of adults under the age of 21 are going to be the victims or perpetrators of “gun violence,” and to me it makes no sense to strip away the Second Amendment rights of 100% of young adults in an attempt to reduce harm among 1% of them.

Targeted enforcement and educational efforts aimed at those young adults would be a much smarter option, in my opinion. I’d like to see West Virginia sheriffs offer free basic gun safety courses for new gun owners, including adults under 21. West Virginia is also a campus carry state, so offering those courses on the campuses of the state’s colleges and universities would be a good idea as well.

I’m not opposed to firearms training at all, but I don’t think that any right should come with a training mandate. Give these young adults (and other new gun owners) options to get educated and trained on the basics of responsible gun ownership and carrying, and many of them will take advantage of those opportunities. And in West Virginia, a fair number of these young adults have grown up in gun-owning households. They’ve been taught gun safety and responsible gun ownership from an early age, so they’re not just picking up a gun and deciding to carry it while remaining totally ignorant of the basic rules of gun handling.

HB 4106 is a big step forward, and one that’s all the more important given the regression in 2A rights taking place in neighboring Virginia. I applaud the West Virginia legislature and Gov. Patrick Morrisey for strengthening the right to keep and bear arms in the Volunteer State, and I hope that other states will soon follow their example.

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.