Second Amendment/ATF related cases

[MechAg94]

The case of Mexico suing gun manufacturers was heard at the Supreme Court yesterday I think.  A couple people livestreamed the audio.  John Crump did a livestream talking about it.  He predicted 8-1 against Mexico, but we will see. 

[Live Life]

The case of Mexico suing gun manufacturers was heard at the Supreme Court yesterday I think.  A couple people livestreamed the audio.  John Crump did a livestream talking about it.  He predicted 8-1 against Mexico, but we will see.

I did 1256 mile 2-day trip to pick up my BIL so no chance to post transcript of arguments.  Mark Smith just did a "highlights" video of the arguments and maybe I will do a bulleted transcription later today/tonight.

SCOTUS NEWS: HIGHLIGHTS OF SCOTUS GUN RIGHTS ARGUMENT... SCOTUS held a major oral argument in Mexico v. Smith & Wesson involving the 2nd Amendment and Mark Smith Four Boxes Diner discusses with recordings from the oral argument in this video - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WYWiKH1-fvM

[Live Life]

Update to Forced Reset Trigger - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1466634#msg1466634

Update from Hannah Hill, Vice President of National Foundation for Gun Rights, legal arm of NAGR

Hannah Hill - https://x.com/hannahhill_sc/status/1897321948453199883

Hey @Kash_Patel and @PamBondi, the ATF is refusing to return seized forced reset triggers although the courts vacated the classification of FRTs as machine guns - the very classification that the FRT seizures were based on.

Are y'all okay with this?

[Live Life]

Adding Ban on Export of Firearms.

Lee Leads GOP Urging End to Biden Firearm Export Rule - https://www.lee.senate.gov/2025/3/lee-leads-gop-urging-end-to-biden-firearm-export-rule

WASHINGTON – Sen. Mike Lee (R-UT) and House Homeland Security Committee Chairman Mark Green (R-TN) have issued a letter with 86 colleagues in the Senate and House requesting that the Secretary of Commerce reverse a rule restricting firearm exports for law-abiding American manufacturers.

“As soon as is practically possible, we respectfully request that you rescind the Department of Commerce Bureau of Industry and Security’s (BIS) recent interim final rule (IFR) “Revision of Firearms License Requirements” (89 FR 34680; RIN 0694-AJ46). This misguided and destructive IFR is costing the American firearms industry nearly $500 million annually while doing nothing to advance U.S. interests or regional stability. Despite numerous attempts to rein in these actions through letters, legislation, hearings, markups, and oversight, the Biden BIS ignored Congress and used the IFR to advance the Biden administration’s anti-firearms agenda.”

“President Trump recently signed an executive order to secure Second Amendment rights. The order instructs Attorney General Pam Bondi to review all orders, regulations, guidance, plans, international agreements, and other actions of executive departments and agencies that violate the Second Amendment or furthered the Biden administration’s anti-firearms agenda. Section (2)(b)(vii) of the executive order specifically requires the review and remediation of any agency action regarding the “processing of applications, to make, manufacture, transfer, or export firearms.” Because this IFR stops the commercial export of firearms, ammunition, and related components to over 36 countries and severely limits the ability of American businesses to obtain export licenses, we believe this IFR ought to be addressed immediately.”

“For too long, federal agencies have tried to constrict our Second Amendment rights indirectly, in this case by hurting law-abiding gun manufacturers by severely limiting their ability to export firearms,” said Sen. Lee. “I look forward to the Trump administration rectifying this unjust rule pushed by Joe Biden’s bureaucrats.”

“The Biden-Harris administration’s interim final rule on issuance and renewal of export licenses for certain firearms, related components, and ammunition has now lasted almost a year,” said Rep. Green. “With the confirmation of Secretary Lutnick, I trust that this IFR will come to an end. BIS’s actions cost American firearm manufacturers over $500 million annually. It’s time to end this attack on the Second Amendment, and I look forward to immediate action from the Department of Commerce.”

You can read the entire letter HERE - https://www.lee.senate.gov/services/files/9684282F-EA8C-4458-A406-13C05944C302

Gun Owners of America - https://x.com/GunOwners/status/1897737969005391881
This was never about safety—it was always about control.

Thank you to @BasedMikeLee & the other leaders fighting to end the tyrannical export restrictions on firearm manufacturers.

The Biden-era policy is a direct attack on the Second Amendment & is costing the industry millions.

[Live Life]

Update to Executive Order on Second Amendment and Efforts to abolish ATF/Repeal NFA/Hearing Protection Act/Legalize suppressor parts - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1466850#msg1466850

Risch Leads Bill to Protect Law-Abiding Gun Owners and Hold ATF Accountable - https://www.risch.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2025/3/risch-leads-bill-to-protect-law-abiding-gun-owners-and-hold-atf-accountable

WASHINGTON - U.S Senator Jim Risch (R-Idaho) introduced legislation today with U.S. Senators Mike Crapo (R-Idaho), Steve Daines (R-Mont.), Cindy Hyde-Smith (R-Miss.), James Lankford (R-Okla.), Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.), Roger Marshall (R-Kansas), and Tim Sheehy (R-Mont.) to improve the fairness, speed, and transparency of background checks and application processes for National Firearms Act (NFA) items. The ATF Transparency Act will ensure law-abiding gun owners experience a fair and speedy application process when exercising their Second Amendment rights.

“Law-abiding gun owners wrongfully denied their Second Amendment rights should be able to appeal their case through an efficient, transparent process,” said Risch. “My ATF Transparency Act is simple. It codifies the current appeals process, holds the ATF to a higher standard, and gives Idaho’s lawful gun owners a faster, fairer process for firearm applications.”

“Lawful gun owners should not be denied their constitutional right to own a firearm because of unchecked bureaucratic rulings,” Crapo said. “A more transparent review and appeals process for those improperly flagged by the ATF will give individuals the due process they rightly deserve."

“The Second Amendment is an integral part of our Montana way of life, and law-abiding citizens should not have to worry about their constitutional rights being denied because of a processing error,” said Daines.“This legislation will create a quick and transparent appeals process for Montanans who have been wrongfully flagged by the ATF, and I’ll continue to stand up for our right to keep and bear arms.”

“No system is infallible, including the federal bureaucracy. The ATF Transparency Act would help ensure law-abiding Americans aren’t denied their Second Amendment rights due to mistakes in their background checks that may wrongfully prevent them from owning a firearm,” Hyde-Smith said. “I credit Senator Risch for leading the charge to fix this injustice.”

"Unelected D.C. bureaucrats at the ATF should not be able to criminalize law-abiding gun owners nor throw up roadblocks for appealing unfair rulings," said Lummis. "I'm proud to work with my Senate colleagues to bring much needed accountability and transparency to the ATF and enhance Americans' constitutional right to bear arms."

“As a lifelong gun owner and supporter of the Second Amendment, I came to the Senate with the mission of protecting this sacred Constitutional right of all Kansans,” said Marshall. “The ATF Transparency Act furthers this mission by requiring the ATF to develop an appeals process to protect Americans’ background checks from being wrongfully denied. This is a commonsense step forward to safeguard the Second Amendment, and I am proud to stand alongside my colleagues in support.”

The ATF Transparency Act has received support from Gun Owners of America and National Rifle Association.

"Gun Owners of America is proud to endorse Sen. Risch's legislation to eliminate ATF's bureaucratic loopholes in the already unconstitutional National Firearms Act. ATF has deceived Congress and the American public with inaccurate NFA approval estimates for far too long. There is no reason that a NFA approval time should take longer than a normal background check, especially since ATF has shown they are able to rapidly approve forms after Congress instructed them to. A Right Delayed is a Right Denied” said Aidan Johnston, Director of Federal Affairs, Gun Owners of America.

“The ATF Transparency Act is a crucial piece of legislation that will allow individuals the opportunity to appeal their denied application of National Firearms Act items. The ambiguity of denials is an issue that must be resolved and the NRA thanks and applauds Sen. Risch for reintroducing this important legislation and standing up for all Americans' Second Amendment rights,” said John Commerford, Executive Director of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action.

The ATF Transparency Act would:

- Codify the appeals process to protect law-abiding Americans’ background checks from being wrongfully denied;

- Require the ATF to process applications within 3 days. If the ATF fails to do so, applications will be automatically approved; and

- Requires the Government Accountability Office and DOJ to report on the number of NFA items involved in unresolved background checks, recommend ways to reduce unresolved checks, and report on the FBI's National Instant Criminal Background Check System involvement.

Gun Owners of America - https://x.com/GunOwners/status/1897760065731371379

We are proud to endorse this legislation to eliminate ATF's bureaucratic loopholes in the already unconstitutional National Firearms Act.

The ATF Transparency Act is a step in the right direction towards gutting tyrannical NFA restrictions and removing the teeth from ATF.🔥

[Live Life]

Update to Executive Order on Second Amendment and Efforts to abolish ATF/Repeal NFA/Hearing Protection Act/Legalize suppressor parts - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1468184#msg1468184

MASSIVE BREAKING NEWS: AG PAM BONDI FORMS 2A RESTORATION WORKING GROUP… Trump Administration Creates DOJ Working Group to Restore 2A Rights and more according to a story in the New York Times - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZterNiVwyhc

- Major breaking news out of the Trump Administration
- A working group has been formed within the Department of Justice to restore Second Amendment rights across this great country
- New York Times has reported about this working group to restore Second Amendment rights
- A small batch of people to get their gun rights back would be the first step toward a broader policy goal ... through rewriting justice
department regulations to more clearly give that power to the attorney general
- This is huge folks
- This is huge because what this is saying is that the Department of Justice is going to redo their regulations about who can have
their Second Amendment rights restored and they're going to take that away from a bunch of unelected DC-based Deep State bureaucrats who won't want anyone armed other than the police/government
- The fact that it is being taken away from Deep State regulators and bureaucrats as far as that's how I interpret that language from The New York Times is great news as far as I'm concerned
- New York Times goes on to discuss this new policy by the Trump Administration in favor of the Second Amendment this is the next thing - Within the working group, the government lawyers seem to generally agree that a significant period of time since a conviction should have passed for someone to be eligible for such relief, perhaps 10 or 15 years and that it should not be extended to convicted murderers and armed robbers but the issue of domestic violence proved to be a sticking point particularly when it came to Mr Mel Gibson
- Again the fact this conversation is occurring is the fact that a new policy is going to be set by this Administration in favor of the Second
Amendment is a really really big deal and a positive side of where the trends are going
- The working group would generate a list of candidates to get back their gun rights as part of a longer term effort to have
the Attorney General restore such rights to some individuals
- Her office came up with an initial batch of 95 people she considered worthy of consideration made up principally of people whose convictions were decades old who had asked for the restrictions to be lifted and for whom the risk of recidivism was low
- As a side note, historically there is a federal statute overseen basically by the ATF for the restoration of rights ... that office has been defunded for the last many years because the Democrats don't want people getting their gun rights back

[Live Life]

Update to Carry Ban cases - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1467500#msg1467500

NOTE: This is a state case

MA Supreme Court rules in favor of out of state carry.

SAF - https://x.com/2AFDN/status/1899830782874759613

The Massachusetts Supreme Court has issued a win for gun rights and a win for Defendant Sean Donnell in a case supported by SAF amici briefing. SAF supporters will remember that Mr. Donnell was arrested and charged in Massachusetts with unlawful possession of a firearm.

Mr. Donnel is a New Hampshire resident who had a permit from his home state, but not a Massachusetts non-resident permit. At the time of his arrest, those MA non-resident permits were "may issue" and nearly impossible to acquire. In today's opinion, the court determined that the prior MA non-resident permitting regime was indeed unconstitutional, as the express holding in Bruen clearly states that "may issue" regimes violate the Second Amendment.

As a result, the court has dismissed the unlawful gun possession charge against Mr. Donnell. Massachusetts has since changed their non-resident permit statute, with the new law having been recently upheld by this same court.

Ruling - https://saf.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/SJC-13561_Slip_Opinion.pdf

The defendant is a New Hampshire resident. On November 8, 2021, he was arrested in Massachusetts for operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol following a collision on Interstate 495 in Lowell. During a search of the vehicle's passenger compartment, a State police trooper found a handgun and ammunition stored inside a duffel bag. Lacking a Massachusetts nonresident firearm license, the defendant was charged with unlawful possession of a firearm in violation of G. L. c. 269, § 10 (a) (§ 10 [a]).

... The issue presented in this case is whether the Commonwealth's "may issue" nonresident firearm licensing scheme in force at the time the defendant committed the unlawful possession offense violates the Second Amendment ... Certainly, the Commonwealth has the power to enforce firearm restrictions within its own borders that are consistent with the United States Constitution. See Marquis

In this case, however, the statutory scheme under which the defendant was charged fails to pass the constitutional test as laid out in Bruen (Page 8)

... Expanding on the historical analysis from Heller and McDonald, the Court held that the Second Amendment right to bear arms for self-defense extends outside the home. Bruen

... The Court further explained that any restriction on that right will be upheld only if "the government ... affirmatively proves that its firearms regulation is part of the historical tradition that delimits the outer bounds of the right to keep and bear arms."  The Court examined the history of American firearm regulations offered in support of New York's licensing scheme and found no historical analogue. Accordingly, the licensing scheme was struck down as inconsistent with the Second Amendment ...  (Page 11)

Because the Commonwealth has failed at step two of the Bruen analysis, we hold that the version of the Commonwealth's nonresident firearm licensing scheme in effect at the time of the offense violates the Second Amendment. Accordingly, as the defendant was charged with violating § 10 (a) after the Supreme Court issued Bruen, he is entitled to dismissal of that charge ... (Page 18)

Our holding today does not, as the Commonwealth suggests, preclude it from requiring firearm licenses for persons within its borders. See Marquis To be consistent with the Second Amendment, the Commonwealth's nonresident firearm licensing scheme cannot vest an official with the discretion to deny a license to a qualified applicant. The defendant was charged under a firearm licensing scheme that did just that. This manner of firearm restriction is no longer permissible. Bruen, supra. Accordingly, the allowance of the defendant's motion to dismiss is affirmed.

So ordered.