The Court That Refuses to Revive ATF's Trigger Rule

Published on November 19, 2023
Duration: 6:48

This video, presented by William Kirk, President of Washington Gun Law, details a significant court ruling where the ATF's attempt to revive its trigger rule was denied. The court found the government failed to demonstrate a likelihood of success on the merits or irreparable harm, effectively keeping the preliminary injunction against the ATF's reclassification of forced reset triggers and Wide Open Triggers in place. Individuals facing ATF enforcement related to these triggers are advised to seek legal counsel.

Quick Summary

A court denied the ATF's motion to revive its trigger rule, finding the government failed to show a likelihood of success on appeal or irreparable harm. The preliminary injunction against classifying FRTs and WOTs as machine guns remains active, with the court citing the 'Cargill' precedent that rate of fire alone doesn't define a machine gun.

Chapters

  1. 00:00Introduction: ATF Trigger Rule Update
  2. 00:29Government's Request to Stay Injunction
  3. 00:58Case Overview: NAGR v. Garland
  4. 01:14Court Denies Government's Motion to Stay
  5. 01:42Legal Requirements for Injunctive Relief
  6. 02:08Court's Ruling on Likelihood of Success
  7. 02:37Federal Machine Gun Definition
  8. 02:42Court's Ruling on Irreparable Harm
  9. 03:14Balance of Equities and Public Interest
  10. 03:50FRT Rate of Fire is Irrelevant
  11. 04:11Plaintiff's Irreparable Harm
  12. 04:30Denial of Motion to Stay Summary
  13. 04:57Final Court Decision
  14. 05:17Current Status and Legal Advice
  15. 05:56Credit to National Association for Gun Rights
  16. 06:13Conclusion and Call to Action

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the outcome of the ATF's attempt to revive its trigger rule?

A court denied the U.S. Government's motion to stay a preliminary injunction against the ATF's trigger rule. This means the injunction remains in place, effectively blocking the ATF's efforts to reclassify certain triggers like FRTs and WOTs as machine guns for now.

Why did the court deny the ATF's motion to stay the injunction?

The court found that the government (defendants) failed to make a strong showing of likely success on the merits of their appeal and did not demonstrate irreparable harm if the stay was not granted. These were critical factors in the denial.

Is the ATF's rule on forced reset triggers (FRTs) currently in effect?

No, as of the court's ruling, the ATF's rule attempting to classify FRTs and similar triggers as machine guns is effectively dead. The preliminary injunction against the rule remains active, and the government's request to pause that injunction was denied.

What is the significance of the 'Cargill' case mentioned in the ruling?

The 'Cargill' case precedent was referenced to emphasize that the statutory definition of a machine gun does not rely solely on the rate of fire. This was a key point in the court's reasoning against the ATF's classification of FRTs.

Related News

All News →

More 2nd Amendment & Law Videos You Might Like

More from Washington Gun Law

View all →