Shuttershock
The Tennessee Firearms Association (TFA) united with Gun Owners of America,
Inc., among other groups, on July 20, 2023, presenting an amicus brief
("friend of the court") endorsing a Petition for a Writ of Certiorari (a
request for the Court to accept the appeal) in the case of
Guedes et al. vs. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, et
al., Supreme Court No: 22-1222. (The TFA's brief can be found in the comprehensive report on their website)
Following the tragic shooting event in Las Vegas in 2017, then President
Donald Trump urged the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
(ATF) to impose a ban on a firearm accessory popularly known as a
"bump-stock". Even though the ATF had previously consistently ruled that
these accessories did not transform a semi-automatic firearm into a machine
gun, in the aftermath of this incident, the ATF deviated from its prior
stance and declared that these devices do indeed convert semi-automatic
firearms into machineguns. Notwithstanding, the Congressional definition of
a machine gun remains unchanged since it was first defined in the National
Firearms Act in 1934.
At the crux of this case lies the interpretation of the term "machinegun",
as established by Congress in 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b). In 2018, the ATF issued
regulations that expanded the interpretation of "machinegun" to include, for
the first time, accessories referred to as non-mechanical bump stocks. When
this interpretation was contested nationwide in federal courts, the ruling
often received approval from the district and appellate courts. Therefore,
the Supreme Court faces the following questions in the petition:
(1) Does the "machinegun" definition in 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b) encompass
non-mechanical bump stocks?
(2) If the "machinegun" definition in 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b) is ambiguous,
should the ambiguity be interpreted against the Government?
In the GOA/TFA amicus brief, we contend that the Congressional definition of
a machinegun cannot include bump stocks and, as a result, the ATF's Rule
contradicts constitutional and statutory language. We also highlight that
currently, the ATF's bump stock rule is unenforceable in the Sixth Circuit,
which includes Tennessee, Kentucky, Ohio, and Michigan.
The Tennessee Firearms Association recognizes the regrettable necessity of
investing in lawsuits and appellate advocacy as Tennessee isn't ardently
defending our constitutional rights, especially when faced with a governor
advocating for proposed Red Flag laws. Moreover, this legal action is
imperative because even with Republicans in control of Congress, they have
consistently failed to restrain the ATF, cut its funding or simply uphold
the Second Amendment’s “shall not be infringed” clause and abolish any
federal agency’s authority to regulate the rights of Americans to purchase,
own, possess, make, use, sell or practice with firearms.
If you're a TFA member and back this legal action, please consider
contributing voluntary donations to support the work. If you're not yet a
member but agree with our cause,
join
us today and we will also invite you to consider
voluntary donations
for litigation.
Your participation is crucial in opposing Bill Lee’s proposed Red Flag
legislation.
Act now and assist the
TFALAC
(a state political action committee) in raising funds for its #RedFlagDown
initiative to create radio ads, social media campaigns, and other
promotional efforts to oppose Bill Lee’s assertion that the state of
Tennessee should disarm law-abiding gun owners in violation of the
Constitution.
No comments:
Post a Comment