{"id":118328,"date":"2026-08-19T12:00:53","date_gmt":"2026-08-19T17:00:53","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=118328"},"modified":"2026-08-19T12:21:20","modified_gmt":"2026-08-19T17:21:20","slug":"118328","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=118328","title":{"rendered":""},"content":{"rendered":"

Federal Judge: ATF\u2019s \u2018Frame and Receiver Rule\u2019 Unconstitutional<\/a><\/p>\n

A federal district court judge in Texas ruled Tuesday that the Biden-era \u201cFinal Rule\u201d on Frames and Receivers as defined by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment and Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment.<\/p>\n

The case is known as\u00a0Defense Distributed v Blanche<\/em>\u00a0(formerly known as\u00a0VanDerStok v. Bondi<\/em>).<\/p>\n

In his\u00a029-page ruling<\/a>, Chief U.S. District Judge Reed O\u2019Connor at the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas writes, \u201cThe Final Rule does not merely lack supporting analogues. It contradicts the actual historical tradition of personal gunsmithing. Self-manufacture of firearms in America was common and indeed foundational to establishing our Nation\u2026<\/p>\n

\u201cThus, the Court ENJOINS Defendants from enforcing 27 C.F.R. \u00a7 478.11 and 27 C.F.R. \u00a7 478.12(c) against Defense Distributed, SAF, or any of SAF\u2019s current or future members with respect to Defense Distributed\u2019s M1911 80% Frames and G80 Build Kit, Unfinished Receiver, and Grip Module.\u201d<\/p>\n

According to a\u00a0Second Amendment Foundation<\/a>\u00a0(SAF) news release announcing the ruling\u2014SAF was a plaintiff in the case\u2014\u201dThe court declared the rule unconstitutional as applied to all SAF members and issued a permanent injunction protecting Defense Distributed and current and future Second Amendment Foundation members as it relates to the specific gun kits involved in the case. SAF and its partners filed for a motion summary judgment in April of this year, which today, the Court granted.\u201d<\/p>\n

A jubilant SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb stated, \u201cIt was obvious from the outset that the Biden ATF\u2019s definition of a \u2018firearm\u2019 was intentionally vague and provided no clear guidance to the average law-abiding American as to what was actually legal.<\/p>\n

\u201cAs it stood previously,\u201d he continued, \u201cthe updated definition, in essence, made a law-abiding citizen a criminal for nothing more than owning a piece of plastic that could be converted into a firearm. That isn\u2019t how it works. Congress set the definition and the ATF can\u2019t unilaterally trump up a revised version to suit their political agenda. The ruling also affirms that you are indeed allowed make firearms in your own home without fear of prosecution.\u201d<\/p>\n

In his ruling, Judge O\u2019Connor\u2014a 2007 George W. Bush appointee\u2014criticized the ATF\u2019s Final Rule for using \u201cabstract and vague language.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\u201cIn April 2022,\u201d the judge wrote, \u201cATF published the Final Rule changing, among other things, the 1978 definition of \u2018frame or receiver.\u2019 ATF split the phrase into two parts, assigning the term \u2018frame\u2019 to handguns and the term \u2018receiver\u2019 to any firearm other than a handgun, such as rifles and shotguns. ATF then defined the terms \u2018frame\u2019 and \u2018receiver\u2019 along the same lines as the 1978 rule, though with updated, more precise technical terminology.<\/p>\n

\u201cBut ATF did not stop there,\u201d Judge O\u2019Connor continues. \u201cRather than merely updating the terminology, ATF decided to regulate partial frames and receivers. Under the new Final Rule, \u2018[t]he terms \u2018frame\u2019 and \u2018receiver\u2019 shall include a partially complete, disassembled, or nonfunctional frame or receiver, including a frame or receiver parts kit, that is designed to or may readily be completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise converted to function as a frame or receiver.\u201d<\/p>\n

This was done during the second year of Joe Biden\u2019s presidency, at a time the firearms community asserted the Biden administration was \u201cweaponizing\u201d ATF against gun owners and the Second Amendment.<\/p>\n

\u201cThis rule was such a mess that it not only violated the Second Amendment but was so terribly drafted that it managed to be ruled unconstitutionally vague,\u201d said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. \u201cThe Court rightly held that the Biden ATF\u2019s rule not only sought to outright prohibit Second Amendment protected conduct but was written in such a vague and vaporous manner as to chill that protected conduct by making it impossible to even know what was legal and what wasn\u2019t.\u201d<\/p>\n

This explains why Judge O\u2019Connor declared, \u201cTherefore, the Court determines that an injunction focused on enforcement and implementation remains necessary to wholly redress Plaintiffs\u2019 injuries. Here, declaratory relief is not enough without the additional protection that flows from the clarity of permanent injunctive relief.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Federal Judge: ATF\u2019s \u2018Frame and Receiver Rule\u2019 Unconstitutional A federal district court judge in Texas ruled Tuesday that the Biden-era \u201cFinal Rule\u201d on Frames and Receivers as defined by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) is unconstitutional under the Second Amendment and Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment. The case is … Continue reading “”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[39,15,23,36],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-118328","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bureaucraps","category-business","category-courts","category-gun-schtuff"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118328","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=118328"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118328\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":118336,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/118328\/revisions\/118336"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=118328"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=118328"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=118328"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}