VanDerStok v. Garland Update, Supreme Court Grants Stay on ATF Final Rule

AmmoLand ^ | August 14, 2023 | Dean Weingarten

[marktwain]

On August 8, 2023, the Supreme Court of the United States, in a 5-4 decision, granted an emergency to the Biden administration in the case of VanDerStok v. Garland.

The case centers around whether the ATF of the Biden administration correctly followed administrative procedure while creating the “Final Rule on a change in the definition of what constitutes a firearm, firearm receiver, or firearm frame, as defined by the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA 1968. The United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit had refused to grant the stay, on the grounds the Biden Administration was likely to lose the case. The case is sent back to the Fifth Circuit for oral arguments. From the Supreme Court:

Application (23A82) for stay presented to Justice Alito and by him referred to the Court is granted. The June 30, 2023 order and July 5, 2023 judgment of the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, case No. 4:22-cv-691, insofar as they vacate the final rule of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, 87 Fed. Reg. 24652 (April 26, 2022), are stayed pending the disposition of the appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit and disposition of a petition for a writ of certiorari, if such a writ is timely sought. Should certiorari be denied, this stay shall terminate automatically. In the event certiorari is granted, the stay shall terminate upon the sending down of the judgment of this Court. Justice Thomas, Justice Alito, Justice Gorsuch, and Justice Kavanaugh would deny the application for stay.

The oral arguments at the Fifth Circuit are scheduled for September 7, 2023. They will be held at the En Banc Courtroom in New Orleans.

[marktwain]

"Ghost guns" is another Orwellian term designed to scare people. They are just guns may by people for their own use. Therefore, they are not required to be regulated by the government. Thus, they prevent the potential of the government to impose a gun registration system, which is already forbidden by federal law.

[Alas Babylon!]

NGL, they are pretty scary, though.

[sauropod]

Say no to newspeak.

[SharpenedEdge]

Roberts. AGAIN. The Government’s actions are unconstitutional on their face. This cannot stand.

[MileHi]

How can any of this serial number/sales records square with Bruen?

[marktwain]

In the Heller decision, in dicta, there is a sentence which states the case does not implicate the regulation of commercial sales.

This has been used to claim Heller says regulation of commercial sales is allowed under the Second Amendment.

But dicta is not a judicial decision; Heller was not about commercial sales. It may be federal and state regulations on commercial sales will eventually be struck down, if we can keep a Republic and court until then.

[MileHi]

But dicta is not a judicial decision

No. And Bruen would clarify that.

[marktwain]

Bruen was not about commercial sales, either.

The standards established under Heller, and strengthened under Bruen, require the government to show a robust historical continuity of the same sort of regulation, in order to be acceptable under the Second Amendment.

There is no such historical record.