Plaintiffs in a federal lawsuit challenging the National Firearms Act have sent a formal request to the U.S. Department of Justice and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, asking how the federal government plans to implement a recent court ruling that struck down key firearm registration requirements.
The request follows a ruling last week by a judge in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, which held that the registration scheme under the NFA for short-barreled rifles, short-barreled shotguns, suppressors, and “any other weapons” (AOWs) is unconstitutional.
The district judge gave the federal government a one-week deadline to file a stay pending appeal. Because the government did not file a stay before the deadline passed, a permanent injunction went into effect Thursday morning. The government retains 60 days from the date of the judgment to file an appeal.
The lawsuit, Jensen v. ATF, is supported by the Second Amendment Foundation. In response to the injunction taking effect, the plaintiffs submitted a letter containing five specific inquiries to the DOJ and ATF:
- Will the government issue formal guidance to regulated entities and individuals regarding compliance with the injunction?
- If guidance is planned, what form will it take and when will it be released?
- Does the government intend to continue enforcing the enjoined provisions of the NFA against individuals or entities not covered by the injunction?
- How does the government plan to prevent enforcing those provisions against entities and individuals who are covered by the injunction?
- If the injunction is later stayed, modified, or dissolved, how will the government treat NFA items manufactured or transferred while the injunction was active?
Organizers involved in the litigation stated that direct communication with federal authorities is necessary to clarify administrative and legal procedures for gun owners.
“We share in the liberty community’s excitement in the receipt of this permanent injunction, and that the government did not seek to have the initial stay extended,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “With the massive first step of having these elements of the NFA struck down now in hand, we need guidance from the government on all the details that will come with law-abiding Americans seeking to avail themselves of this injunction. To better help educate anyone covered under the ruling, Plaintiffs and their counsel determined the best path forward was to ask the ATF and DOJ directly about how the government plans to comply with the court’s judgment.”
SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb added that the plaintiffs sought to prevent confusion regarding the status of the law.
“Plaintiffs met with counsel over the course of the day and felt the best move for their members, supporters and the public at large is to ask direct questions to the government as it relates to the ruling,” Gottlieb said. “It’s much better to get answers straight from the source than to rely on second- and third-hand information online. We’re hopeful we receive a quick response from the government so the public will be better educated on what is – and is not – allowed under the injunction.”
READ: $100K Bail Set For Pennsylvania Man Accused Of Throwing Sleeping Child At Walmart
Please make a small donation to the Tampa Free Press to help sustain independent journalism. Your contribution enables us to continue delivering high-quality, local, and national news coverage.
Sign up: Subscribe to our free newsletter for a curated selection of top stories delivered straight to your inbox.
