The Second Amendment advocacy organization declared it is targeting “the failings of the new rule — which subjects law-abiding gun owners to penalties, fines, and potential prison sentences for the use of an otherwise legal plastic apparatus on some firearms.”
The historical gun rights group previously submitted comments against the new ATF rule. It further filed a motion to intervene in a separate legal action and threw its support behind another lawsuit brought by multiple state attorneys general in North Dakota.
NRA Executive Vice President and CEO Wayne LaPierre said the NRA is making a strong push to support gun owners’ rights. “We are confident in our ability to confront the ATF and DOJ — and preserve freedom for NRA members.”
Stabilizer pistol braces may be attached to the back of a firearm and make it simpler to aim and fire with one hand. They were designed more than a decade ago to enable disabled veterans the chance to continue to enjoy sport shooting.
The ATF until recently confirmed their legality but then had a change of heart.
The new agency rule categorizes pistols that employ these accessories as short-barreled rifles, resulting in a completely different weapon under the law. These redefined firearms now require a federal license to own.
The agency sprang the announcement of the new and arbitrary rule in January 2023. It set the deadline for compliance with the regulation, along with mandatory registration if other conditions were not met, of June 1, 2023.
Those conditions included modifying their braces so they may not be reattached, destroying them or surrendering them altogether.
Those otherwise law-abiding citizens who fail to comply could face up to 10 years in prison, a $10,000 fine, or both.
The state of Texas and multiple gun rights groups sued the ATF and were granted preliminary injunctive relief from the burdensome edict.
The NRA, being the largest and oldest gun rights organization in the U.S., has roughly 350,000 members in Texas alone. It asked the court to recognize “the irreparable harm its members also face” from enforcement of the pistol brace rule.
In its complaint, the NRA argued that the ATF reversal of its position on pistol braces is unconstitutional. This new position means, unless successfully challenged, that owners will face burdensome registration and taxation requirements as they now fall under the National Firearms Act.
In its filing, the gun rights group requested preliminary injunctive relief preventing the ATF from enforcing its new rule against NRA members in good legal standing. The goal, of course, is to make that relief permanent and shield membership from overreaching agency regulation.
Besides the agency, ATF Director Steven Dettelbach and Attorney General Merrick Garland are named defendants in the legal filing.
There is a current push in Congress to nullify the ATF’s final rule and restore gun owners’ rights, but it is not likely to succeed. The bipartisan measure cleared the House last month and is headed for the Senate. That is the good news.
However, the Senate is not likely to pass the bill, and even if it did, the White House has all-but-promised a veto if it reaches the president’s desk. The chances of overriding that veto are nil.
The NRA proved once again why it has so much support from the sporting public. It is standing up to yet another federal government overreach and insisting that the sanctity of the Second Amendment be respected. Through this and other similar efforts, there is hope that this latest burdensome regulation will be relegated to the trash heap.
