The National Rifle Association (NRA) has filed a lawsuit against U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) challenging a federal rule related to firearms dealers.
The ATF imposed a rule in April redefining what constitutes being “engaged in the business” of dealing firearms to include individuals who sell a smaller number of guns. The lawsuit, filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Alabama, seeks an injunction to stop enforcement of the rule.
The NRA argues that the ATF overstepped its authority by issuing the rule, which they allege subjects more people to strict regulations and federal licensing requirements. (RELATED: Trump-Appointed Judge Halts Biden ATF Rule Changing Definition of ‘Firearms Dealer’)
“The Executive Branch cannot step into Congress’s shoes and write laws for our nation,” the complaint states, arguing that the rule would criminalize activities that were previously lawful.
🚨NRA Files Lawsuit Challenging ATF’s “Engaged in the Business” Rule
This lawsuit is being filed on the heels of recent U.S. Supreme Court decisions that have reined in executive branch agencies from acting outside of statutory authority.
Read more⬇️https://t.co/5SIB9HPYZ2 pic.twitter.com/zjndQibyCw
— NRA (@NRA) July 22, 2024
“Congress’s clear legislative will has always been—and still is—that private buyers and sellers of firearms fall outside the scope of federal statutory restrictions on dealers,” the lawsuit insists, noting that the rule “drastically expands the scope of federal criminal liability.”
The plaintiffs also point out the impact of the rule on those with personal firearm collections.
“Congress has, by legislative enactment, regulated firearms dealers who are ‘engaged in the business’ of selling firearms since 1938…The phrase ‘engaged in the business’ remained undefined until 1986 when Congress amended the Gun Control Act of 1968 to ensure that law-abiding citizens could engage in private, unregulated transactions involving firearms without fear of prosecution,” according to the complaint.
The Supreme Court in June upheld a federal law barring anyone subject to a domestic violence restraining order from possessing a firearm in the case of United States v. Rahimi. The court ruled that the law does not violate the Second Amendment. It was the first Second-Amendment related case the court adjudicated since its ruling in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen in 2022.
