{"id":98386,"date":"2023-12-07T19:37:23","date_gmt":"2023-12-08T01:37:23","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=98386"},"modified":"2023-12-07T19:37:23","modified_gmt":"2023-12-08T01:37:23","slug":"98386","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/milesfortis.com\/?p=98386","title":{"rendered":""},"content":{"rendered":"

Polymer80\u2019s Injunction Stayed for Supreme Court<\/a><\/p>\n

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has stayed Polymer80\u2019s injunction issued against the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) frames and receiver rule (ATF final rule 2021R-05F) in\u00a0Polymer80 v. Garland<\/em>\u00a0until the Supreme Court of The United States (SCOTUS) can decide whether to grant a writ of certiorari in\u00a0VanDerStok v. Garlan<\/em>d<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Polymer80 sued the ATF in a Texas federal court over the ATF rule against what the Biden administration calls \u201cghost guns\u201d and the ATF refers to as privately manufactured firearms (PMF). The company is the country\u2019s biggest seller of unserialized 80% frames and accounts for the vast majority of the market. After the injunction was issued, it returned to selling complete kits, including the frame, jigs, and drill bits.<\/p>\n

The Fifth Circuit\u2019s stay on the injunction was expected after SCOTUS stepped in and stayed injunctions for other companies, such as 80 Percent Arms and Defense Distributed in\u00a0VanDerStok v. Garland<\/em>. The stay allowed the ATF to enact the frames rule. The stay will last until a writ of cert is denied, or SCOTUS issues a judgment.<\/strong><\/p>\n

\u201cIT IS ORDERED that Appellants\u2019 opposed motion to stay the injunction pending appeal is GRANTED. In accordance with the stay granted by the Supreme Court in\u00a0Garland v. VanDerStok<\/em>, if a petition for a writ of certiorari is not timely sought in\u00a0VanDerStok<\/em>, this stay shall terminate automatically as of the date on which the petition was due; and if a petition for a writ of certiorari is timely sought in\u00a0VanDerStok<\/em>, this stay shall remain in effect until either (a) the date on which the Supreme Court denies certiorari, at which time the Supreme Court\u2019s stay will terminate automatically, or (b) if the Supreme Court grants certiorari, the date on which the Supreme Court issues its judgment,\u201d the order reads.<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p><\/blockquote>\n

In the\u00a0VanDerStok<\/em>\u00a0case, Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Chief Justice John Roberts joined the progressive members of the Supreme Court in issuing the stay until the government files a writ of certiorari with the court. The other Republican-appointed judges would have let the injunction stand until the final decision.<\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\n
\n
If the Fifth Circuit didn\u2019t issue a stay, the ATF would most likely have returned to SCOTUS and asked for an emergency stay. Due to the SCOTUS ruling in VanDerStok<\/em>, there is a high probability that SCOTUS would have stayed the injunction. The stay does not mean Polymer80 is less likely to succeed on the merits of the case. On the contrary, the company getting an injunction could mean that the courts believe that Polymer80 will likely succeed.<\/div>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals is the country\u2019s most Second Amendment-friendly federal court. The court has ruled against the government in disarming Americans (United States v. Rahimi<\/em>), the bump stock ban (Cargill v. Garland<\/em>), and the pistol stabilizing brace rule (Mock v. Garland<\/em>). Many of these cases share similar traits, such as violating the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). The bump stock case,\u00a0Cargill v. Garland<\/em>, has been granted cert by SCOTUS. Oral arguments in front of SCOTUS were heard in the\u00a0United States v. Rahimi<\/em>.<\/p>\n

Although a stay isn\u2019t what gun owners want, the government is still facing an uphill battle to defend its rules.<\/strong><\/p>\n