After what seems like a year of defeats for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in the courts, the ATF keeps losing. This time, it is forced reset triggers (FRT).
The case, National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR) v. Merrick Garland, was filed by Rare Breed Triggers and NAGR in a Texas Federal District Court challenging the ATF’s opinion that forced reset triggers such as the Rare Breed FRT-15 are machine guns. The ATF has been sending out letters to and visiting owners of the triggers demanding that the users turn over the items to the ATF or face possible charges for violating the National Firearms Act of 1934. At least three people have been charged with NFA violations for having FRTs. A conviction for violating the NFA could carry a penalty of up to ten years of imprisonment and a $250,000 fine.
Federal District Court Judge Reed O’Connor ruled in early October that the plaintiffs had proven that they were likely to succeed on the merits of the case. Judge O’Connor issued a preliminary injunction (PI) barring the ATF from taking enforcement actions over forced reset triggers. The ATF appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals and asked the court to stay the lower court’s decision.
The Fifth Circuit has now reviewed the ATF’s motion and denied the requested stay, meaning the injunction will remain in place for now, protecting the public from the ATF taking enforcement actions over Rare Breed’s FRT-15. The Circuit Court believed the defendants didn’t meet the requirements for a stay on the injunction.
“Defendants have fallen short of meeting their burden to justify a stay pending appeal,” The Fifth Circuit Order reads. “Their motion to stay the district court’s preliminary injunction pending appeal is therefore DENIED.”
The Fifth Circuit Court leaned on its own Cargill case, which ruled that the ATF overstepped its powers when it banned bump stocks and claimed that the device was a machine gun. Judge O’Connor also relied on the Cargill case when he ruled that FRTs do not function as a drop in auto sear (DIAS) as the ATF claimed. The Fifth Circuit agreed that FRTs do not meet the definition of a machine gun.
“As the district court noted, it is undisputed that, ‘[w]hen firing multiple shots using an FRT, the trigger must still reset after each round is fired and must separately function to release the hammer by moving far enough to the rear in order to fire the next round.’ The district court evaluated the Defendants’ zip-tie test, which Defendants argue shows that FRTs fire like machine guns,” The Circuit Court’s decision reads. ‘In a machine gun,’ the district court explained, ‘the trigger must be held in its rearmost position for the gun to fire automatically.’ The district court found that, to the contrary, if the FRT trigger is constantly held in its most rearward position, ‘the weapon would malfunction and not fire subsequent shots.’ ‘Instead, the elasticity in the zip tie allows for sufficient movement to allow for a trigger reset.’”
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals has handed the ATF multiple defeats, and this case doesn’t appear any different than the prior lawsuits against the ATF in Texas. The case is not over, but for the ATF to win, it might need to reach the Supreme Court.
Fifth Circuit Denies ATF’s Request For Stay on the Districts Courts FRT Injunction by AmmoLand Shooting Sports News on Scribd
About John Crump
John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.
from https://ift.tt/rRuDpFo
via IFTTT
No comments:
Post a Comment