The Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) has ruled by a margin of 5-4 that the stay on the lower court’s decision to vacate the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) rule on the “Definition of ‘Frame or Receiver’ and Identification of Firearms” (FINAL RULE 2021R-05F) will continue.
A District judge vacated the entire ATF’s frames and receiver rule in Vanderstok v. Garland when JSD Supply and Polymer80 intervened in the suit challenging the ATF’s authority. The government immediately appealed to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, where a panel of three judges stayed two parts of the lower court’s decision but left the third part that deals with unfinished frames and receivers vacated.
Instead of seeking an en banc hearing where the whole bench would hear the appeal, the government appealed directly to SCOTUS. Although it is usual for a defendant to ask for an en banc hearing, nothing requires it. In this case, the leaning of the court and its views on the ATF violating the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) meant there was no road to victory in the Circuit Court. The court ruled by a margin of 13-3 in Cargill v. Garland, which challenged the ATF’s rule banning bump stocks. The arguments in both cases are similar.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett and Chief Justice John Roberts joined the progressive members of the court in extending the stay until the government files a writ of certiorari with the court. A writ of certiorari is a petition to the high court to hear the case. Just because the stay was extended doesn’t mean the court will take on the case. Justices Alito, Kavanaugh, and Gorsuch would have lifted the stay.
The court ruled that the government must file for a writ of certiorari in a timely manner to avoid the stay from being lifted. If the court denies cert in the case, then the stay would immediately end.
Although disappointing for the Second Amendment community, this shouldn’t be seen as any indication of how SCOTUS will rule in the case or if the court will even grant cert. The stay is procedural. The court did not address the merits of the case or the likelihood that the case would succeed. It also doesn’t set a legal precedent that will affect other cases or even this case at the Circuit level.
The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals will still have an opportunity to hear the case and rule on the merits. The court could still knock down the rule if it determines the case for the plaintiffs. Many on both sides of the debate believe that the Fifth Circuit will rule in favor of the plaintiffs.
The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC), which helped bring the case, expressed disappointment but also highlighted that the court did not rule on the merits of the case.
“We’re deeply disappointed that the Court pressed pause on our defeat of ATF’s rule effectively redefining ‘firearm’ and ‘frame or receiver’ under federal law,” said Cody J. Wisniewski, FPCAF’s General Counsel and Vice President of Legal, and FPC’s counsel in this case. “Regardless of today’s decision, we’re still confident that we will yet again defeat ATF and its unlawful rule at the Fifth Circuit when that Court has the opportunity to review the full merits of our case.”
The current injunctions held by 80% Arms, Polymer80, and Defense Distributed remain in place.
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.
You deserve the Tyranny…You Allow. This is what you get when you rely on politicians and judges to decide what your Rights are. nuff said.
Being governed by people elected by citizens is one thing. Allowing those people to defy your Rights and having your Rights decided by people who are not elected is akin to Tyranny. Either way doing nothing to stop it is being a Subject, not a Citizen.
You sure got that right!! Except that no one is elected into office any longer, now, it’s all by special appointment by the ones who own and operate the voting machines!! The fraud, fallacy and corruption of electronic voting machines is being shoved right into our face, and it stinks like a fresh pile of doggie-doo, but people continue to put all of their faith in the legal system and electoral system!!
It’s much simpler then that.
Politicians must be held accountable for campaign promises that they directly contradict or violate.
If this happens, they should be impeached instantly and sent to a max security prison for 5 years. Never to be allowed to hold any public office again.
That will end this tyranny in a heart beat.
*checking my Constitution to see where AGENCIES can make law*
*…….still checking*
*…….nothing yet…..*
I’ll keep looking though and let you know if I find it….
Don’t look to hard. You won’t find something that’s not there.
You’re wasting good reloading energy.
Wait a minute? MY understanding of the Constitution and THOSE that are elected are to GOVERN OUR AFFAIRS as per the Constitution as per what WE, The PEOPLE decide, NOT to attempt to rule over us? THAT is in rescission of our contractual agreement which means the Constitution no longer applies. Yeah, I know. Another big word; Rescission: If you as well as the other party committed the same mistake in entering into the contract, you may break it. This is called rescission. If one side does something improper, like misrepresent itself or commit fraud, you may be able to… Read more »
So what are you going to do about it? Besides whine, piss and moan. You deserve the Tyranny…You Allow.
Quit paying taxes and see how long it takes to get the Bill of Rights restored in its entirety. Cut the head off that frickin’ snake!
http://facebook.com/F.O.B.Harmony
Safety ? Over freedom. We will have neither . FJB and the SCOTUS.
And another thing to consider. Since the USSC/SCOTUS reversed Roe v. Wade, didn’t they also expose the entire legal system as being incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial?? I keep on asking that question here and in other places too, but no one dares to even just look at it, let alone touch it. Why is that so?
The legal system is the government/private system which is the active arm of corporations who wish to expand their sales territory and people divorcing their spouse and getting money. So it is a money laundering system for the most part. Originally, I presume it dealt with bringing in line various legislative language deficiencies caused by legislators and their cognitive problems. In addition, we now we have activists use of the system to punish one set of people for doing what another set of people abhor.
Does this pretty much sum it up?
HLB
When you bring up the fact that SCOTUS does not make law and Roe was a made into a law by the libtard court in 1973, people just respond “but it’s been 50 years should be the law. These ass clowns have no concept of how system of government is supposed to work. When you tell them the Democrats had 50 years to codify Roe into law they have nothing to say. These pussies just complain with they are faced with the fact that our Constitution and Bill of Rigjts are more important than their F@cking Feelings. I say F@ck… Read more »
That Justice Amy Coney Barrett sided with the liberal progressives was a surprise. Chief Justice John Roberts: yeah, well, not so much of a surprise.
“where a panel of three judges stayed two parts of the lower court’s decision but left the third part that deals with unfinished frames and receivers vacated.” This was the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals issuing a stay on the District courts decision. Vacated would mean the frames and receivers government rule would still be in effect. Stay means to halt further legal process on that particular part. In this case the SCOTUS let the “Stay” stand which includes the “vacated” part on frames and receivers. “If the court denies cert in the case, then the stay would immediately end.”… Read more »
John, your last sentence implies the 3 plaintiffs are operating as per normal:
That would be good.
seeing that made think about the status of Tactical Machining’s injunction.
Phark SCROTUS!
Look at this from another perspective.
This could be a good way to get SCOTUS to take the case. We might be in good shape.
Do not read to much into this ruling.
They basically remanded this back to the Fifth Circuit. It could be a good thing forming them to hear the case.
And the tyranny comes out of the legal system, just like political power flows out of the barrel of a gun!! WHY are these easily demonstrable facts so hard for people to see? Is everyone but me too afraid to look at them??