Mock v. Garland (Pistol Brace Ban)

[sbhaven]

Fifth circuit issues a preliminary injunction against the ATF in the Mock v. Garland case.

The order: https://thereload.com/app/uploads/2023/05/Mock_v_Garland_Order_Granting_Motion_for_Injunction_Pending_Appeal.pdf

Fifth Circuit Blocks Biden Pistol-Brace Ban

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) can't enforce President Joe Biden's ban on pistol-brace-equipped guns.

That's the result of a ruling from a three-judge panel on the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals released on Tuesday. The court issued a preliminary injunction against Biden's brace ban in Mock v. Garland. The scope of the order may be limited to the named plaintiffs in the case, which was brought by two individual plaintiffs and the gun-rights group Firearms Policy Coalition.

"IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Appellants' Opposed Motion For a Preliminary Injunction Pending Appeal is GRANTED as to the Plaintiffs in this case," the court wrote.

The panel also expidited the schedule for hearing the merits of the case, but didn't provide any explanation of the ruling.

The injunction means that when the grace period for registering guns that the ATF now considers short-barrel rifles, which must be registered under the National Firearms Act of 1934, the agency won't be able to arrest anyone over possession of those unregistered guns. The deadline for registering those guns, which includes millions of pistol-brace-equipped firearms, is set for the end of the month. Now, brace owners will receive a temporary reprieve as the case continues to be litigated.

The ruling represents another blow to President Biden's gun policy agenda. A federal judge also recently blocked his attempt to ban the sale of unfinished gun parts by reclassifying them as equivalent to functioning guns. And multiple courts have also blocked former president Donald Trump's (R.) bump stock ban, which used much of the same legal reasoning Biden has relied on for his executive actions.

The panel scheduled the hearing on the merits of the pistol-brace case for the "next available Oral Argument Calendar.

Erik Longnecker, Deputy Chief of the ATF's Public Affairs Division, said the agency couldn't speak about the ruling and directed people to the rule for further details on compliance.

"ATF is unable to comment on this litigation related to short-barreled rifles," he told The Reload.

Gun-rights advocates celebrated the ruling, but said more action is needed. Gun Owners of America, which filed an amicus breif supporting the plaintiffs, called on Congress to block the ATF rule.

"This injunction is welcome news, but due to it's limited nature, we still need Congress to act before the June 1st deadline," Aidan Johnsotn, the group's Director of Federal Affairs, said in a statement.

[Broadhead]

Limited to the named plaintiffs.  Not ideal but it is something to work with.....

[nutter]

Limited to the named plaintiffs.  Not ideal but it is something to work with.....

My limited reading says it is not limited to just those names-the blackrifle website has more than a few threads on this. might be time to donate to FPC

[sbhaven]

My limited reading says it is not limited to just those names-the blackrifle website has more than a few threads on this. might be time to donate to FPC

Normally the injunction applies to either the plaintiffs themselves or just to those in the jurisdiction the court oversees (fifth circuit in this case).

Guns & Gadgets guy claims its not nation wide.... YET...
Further he claims its only for the plaintiffs in the case. Probably going to take some lawyers to explain exactly how far this injunction goes.

[sbhaven]

Mark Smith/Four Boxes Diner....

He appears to indicate the injunction isn't nation wide, rather appears to only impact the plaintiffs. He's not sure if members of the FPC or any of the other plaintiff groups are covered by the injunction.

He refers to his video from earlier in the day as well.

[sbhaven]

Tom Grieve gives his commentary. He thinks it applies only to the plaintiffs.

[sbhaven]

Per this video apparently the plaintiffs have asked for a clarification on who is affected by the TRO.

https://gunowners.com/images/cases/TexasVATF/5th_Circuit_Request_to_Clarify_injunction.pdf

"Earlier today this Court granted Appellants' motion for an injunction pending appeal "as to the Plaintiffs in this case." ECF No. 52-2 (Appendix A attached). Appellants respectfully request clarification before the Final Rule goes into effect on May 31, 2023, as to the scope of that injunction to avoid any inadvertent violations of the Final Rule by persons who are uncertain if they are protected by the injunction. The government opposes this motion and plans to file an opposition."

[sbhaven]

Fifth circuit court responds to plaintiffs motion to clarify. 

https://assets.nationbuilder.com/firearmspolicycoalition/pages/6710/attachments/original/1685129339/Mock_v_Garland_Order_on_Motion_for_Clarification.pdf?1685129339

"This clarification is granted essentially for the reasons concisely set forth in the May 25, 2023, Plaintiffs-Appellants' Reply to Their Opposed Motion for Clarification of Injunction Pending Appeal. There, the appellants acknowledge that "[a]lthough a nationwide injunction would have functionally addressed the question of scope, on which Plaintiffs now seek clarity, Plaintiffs understand that one was not given . . . . Instead, Plaintiffs merely request clarification on whether their reading of the term 'Plaintiffs' to include the customers and members whose interests Plaintiffs Maxim Defense and Firearms Policy Coalition ('FPC') have represented since day one of this litigation is correct."

That reading is correct. Also as requested, the term "Plaintiffs in this case" includes the individual plaintiffs' resident family members."

Fifth Circuit Clarifies that its Injunction Against ATF Pistol Brace Rule Covers FPC's Members

Today, Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) released a statement on the Fifth Circuit's Order clarifying that the Injunction Pending Appeal in Mock v. Garland applies to FPC's members, Maxim Defense's customers, and the individual plaintiffs' resident family members. The order, along with other case documents, can be viewed at FPCLaw.org.

FPC challenged ATF's administrative rule that seeks to reclassify "braced pistols" as "short-barreled rifles." In so doing, the rule would transform millions of peaceable people into felons overnight simply for owning a firearm that has been lawful to own for a decade, unless they either destroy their constitutionally protected property or comply with the NFA's onerous and unconstitutional requirements.

FPC has argued that the rule is a violation of both the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act because it infringes upon the fundamental and natural rights of the People. Plaintiffs sought declaratory and injunctive relief to secure their constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms.

Per the Fifth Circuit's Order: "This clarification is granted essentially for the reasons concisely set forth in the May 25, 2023, Plaintiffs-Appellants' Reply to Their Opposed Motion for Clarification of Injunction Pending Appeal. . . Plaintiffs merely request clarification on whether their reading of the term ʻPlaintiffs' to include the customers and members whose interests Plaintiffs Maxim Defense and Firearms Policy Coalition (ʻFPC') have represented since day one of this litigation is correct.'  That reading is correct. Also as requested, the term "Plaintiffs in this case" includes the individual plaintiffs' resident family members."

"We're incredibly excited to report that the Fifth Circuit has clarified that our injunction covers FPC's members and Maxim Defense's customers, as we have always argued for," said Cody J. Wisniewski, Senior Attorney for Constitutional Litigation. "This relief will offer protection while we continue to fight against ATF's overreach."

Individuals who would like to Join the FPC Grassroots Army and support important pro-rights lawsuits and programs can sign up at JoinFPC.org. Individuals and organizations wanting to support charitable efforts in support of the restoration of Second Amendment and other natural rights can also make a tax-deductible donation to the FPC Action Foundation. For more on FPC's lawsuits and other pro-Second Amendment initiatives, visit FPCLegal.org and follow FPC on Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube.

Firearms Policy Coalition (firearmspolicy.org), a 501(c)4 nonprofit organization, exists to create a world of maximal human liberty, defend constitutional rights, advance individual liberty, and restore freedom. FPC's efforts are focused on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms and adjacent issues including freedom of speech, due process, unlawful searches and seizures, separation of powers, asset forfeitures, privacy, encryption, and limited government. The FPC team are next-generation advocates working to achieve the Organization's strategic objectives through litigation, research, scholarly publications, amicus briefing, legislative and regulatory action, grassroots activism, education, outreach, and other programs.

FPC Law (FPCLaw.org) is the nation's first and largest public interest legal team focused on the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, and the leader in the Second Amendment litigation and research space.