Texas Fed Judge rules ATF Frame & Receiver Law Unconstitutional

[PVBoom]

EPA ruling.

ATF exceeding their role.

https://youtu.be/3r6IGl-BthY

[Double Naught Spy]

Cool. Yes, yes they did.

[grayfox]

I read the judge's ruling. He states (as part of determining whether to grant a preliminary injunction) that the plaintiffs have a prima facie case on the illegality of ATF's attempt to redefine weapon, receiver, and frame into "parts of..." the same, they have demonstrated that they will more than likely prevail. It still has a ways to go but the track seems to favor throwing out those parts of the rule, as being illegal over reach of the ATF.
"Parts of" a thing does not constitute the thing itself. Congress explicitly chose not to do so for firearms. ATF would have no authority to regulate parts of a receiver, or frame, if this carries through to the end of the case.
He even uses the '68 GCA to refute and knock down ATF's reasoning and new re-definitions.
Using their own devices against them. How sweet.

[lazyengineer]

Not seeing buzz on this anywhere else - are there any other links to this - maybe one to the actual rulling?

[grayfox]

  VanDerStok_v_Garland_Order_on_MPI.pdf (Size: 349.17 KB / Downloads: 10)


The guns n gadgets U-tube channel has a link. I'll try to post the ruling here.
But yeah, no play as of now in the news...

[lazyengineer]

VanDerStok_v_Garland_Order_on_MPI.pdf


The guns n gadgets U-tube channel has a link. I'll try to post the ruling here.
But yeah, no play as of now in the news...

Thank you, sometimes I'm not able or in a setting where watching a youtube video works so good for me.

[Two Tone]

What happens if the ATF ignores the ruling?

I think we are at that point in this country.

[PVBoom]

Then their stuff gets tossed out in courts. Courts are where they need to get people tried. The top court has said they can't (essentially).

It's political parties that ignore laws, until a government body or court reigns them in.