Texas v ATF - Private sales

[Euler]

The case was filed in the Federal District of Northern Texas on May 1. (docket)

Other plaintiffs at this time are Gun Owners Foundation, GOA, LA, MS, UT, Tennessee Firearms Association, Virginia Citizens Defense League, and an individual plaintiff.

At issue is the ATF "final rule" which requires private individuals to possess a Federal Firearm License if they sell firearms which are not part of a personal collection. Firearms owned for self-defense are prohibited from being classified as being part of a personal collection. (i.e., Selling firearms owned for self-defense thus requires a license.)

Complaint said:

...

3. While purporting to amend federal regulations to comport with recently amended federal firearms statutes, the Final Rule goes far beyond the subtle change Congress made to the law, subjecting hundreds of thousands of law-abiding gun owners to presumptions of criminal guilt for all manner of activities relating to the innocuous, statutorily authorized, and constitutionally protected private sale of firearms.
4. This Court's action is necessary on an urgent basis because, contrary to past practice, Defendants have accelerated the effective date of their latest edict to a mere 30 days from publication in the Federal Register, in an attempt to circumvent timely judicial review. ... (90 days for bump stock rule ... 120 days for "frame or receiver" rule ... 120 days for pistol stabilizing brace rule). And so that (once again) hundreds of thousands of Americans are not turned into felons overnight, this Court should administratively stay, temporarily restrain, or preliminarily enjoin the Final Rule pending full review on the merits.

...

[Euler]

It's kind of a twin of Kansas v US Attorney General.

[JTHunter]

In reading the news feeds tonight, there was an article about this (I didn't keep the link) that talked about these 2 paired cases and that there were over 20 states that have already joined on or the other of these two filings.

 

Things are definitely heating up. 🤔 😄

[Euler]

On May 9, the plaintiffs filed a motion for a temporary restraining order.

On May 10, the plaintiffs filed an unopposed motion for an expedited briefing schedule for preliminary relief, since the final rule goes into effect May 20. The judge granted the expedited schedule the same day. The schedule is as follows:

May 14: defendants' response to the motion for preliminary relief due
May 15: plaintiffs' reply to defendants' response due

[TRussell]

It's now at 21 states. Wyoming joined.

[Euler]

WY is a plaintiff in Judicial Second Amendment Case Discussion > Kansas v US Attorney General - Private sales.

[Euler]

On May 16, the judge took the motion for a TRO/preliminary injunction under advisement.

[Euler]

On May 19, the judge granted a temporary restraining order (TRO), blocking the ATF from enforcing the "final rule" on private sales against the plaintiffs, effective through June 2. Plaintiffs include GOA, Tennessee Firearms Association, Virginia Citizens Defense League, and (by extension) their members.

ATF had argued that GOA, TFA, and VCDL must supply a list of their members in order for their members to be covered by the TRO. The court ruled that supplying a list of their members was not required.

Somewhat bizarrely IMO, TX is protected by the TRO because it collects sales tax. The other state plaintiffs (LA, MS, UT) are NOT covered by the TRO.

June 2 is the date on which the court will hear arguments for a preliminary injunction. Parties are ordered to file supplemental briefs before then.

[Euler]

On May 16, Levi Rudder filed to intervene in the case as a plaintiff to gain any relief granted the exiting plaintiffs. The defense opposed. The existing plaintiffs did not respond to the notice of filing.

Levi Rudder is a Texas resident, a private individual, and not a lawyer, but has previously been sanctioned by federal district courts in Texas and CA5 for practicing law and interfering with other cases as if he were a lawyer. Part of that sanction is that he may not file documents with any court without first obtaining the relevant court's permission.

On May 23, citing the existing sanctions and Rudder's lack of obtaining prior permission to file, the judge denied his motion to intervene. Additionally, although it wasn't necessary, the judge analyzed Rudder's motion and ruled it insufficient to justify intervention, anyway.

[Euler]

On June 2, Levi Rudder filed a motion to intervene again.

On June 5, the judge denied his motion again.

[Euler]

On June 11, the court granted a preliminary injunction against the enforcement of the "final rule" against all plaintiffs, including LA, MS, and UT this time.

[Euler]

On July 2, the ATF filed notice that it is appealing the preliminary injunction to the 5th Circuit.

[Euler]

On July 9, CA5 docketed the appeal as 24-10612.

[Euler]

On July 23, the CA5 ordered ATF to file its brief by September 3.

[Euler]

On July 25, the district judge set the following schedule:

September 17: Administrative record due
October 22: Plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment due
November 26: Defendants' response and cross-motion for summary judgment due
December 17: Plaintiffs' response and reply due
January 7: Defendants' reply due

[Euler]

On August 19, the government asked the circuit court to extend the deadline for the appeal brief (from September 3). The court extended the deadline to September 17.

On September 17, the government met the deadline.

[Euler]

On October 2, Texas (led by GOA, actually) asked to extend the deadline for its response brief.

On October 3, the court extended the deadline to November 18.

On November 18, Texas met its deadline.

On November 20, the ATF asked to extend the deadline to file its reply brief.

On November 25, the court extended the deadline to December 19.

On December 19, the ATF met its deadline.

[Euler]

On January 7, ATF met its district court reply brief deadline.

[Euler]

On January 16, several states filed a motion in district court to intervene as defendants. [Basically, the states don't think that the Trump ATF will choose to defend this case, so they'll do it themselves.] Led by New Jersey, the states are Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington.

On January 29, ATF asked for an extension to file a response to the motion to intervene.

On January 30, the judge extended the deadline to respond to the motion to intervene to March 3. Replies, if any, are due March 17.

Edited February 28, 2025 at 04:51 AM by Euler

[Euler]

On February 19, the ATF/DOJ filed a motion in district court to stay the case.

On February 26, the judge denied the motion to stay. The schedule set on January 30 still applies.

Edited February 28, 2025 at 04:53 AM by Euler

[Euler]

On February 21, the appellate court scheduled oral arguments for April 28.

On February 23, the ATF/DOJ filed a motion to put the appellate case in abeyance.

On March 3, the appellate court put the case in abeyance until June 23.

Presumably, the oral arguments scheduled for April 28 are canceled.

[Euler]

Meanwhile, the district case continues.

On March 3, Texas and the ATF/DOJ met their deadline to respond to the NJ motion to intervene.

Keep the popcorn handy.

Edited March 21, 2025 at 03:56 AM by Euler

[Euler]

On March 17, the states moving to intervene met the deadline to reply in district court.

[Euler]

On April 25, the district court abeyed the case until June 23 to "align" it with the 5th Circuit appeal.

[Euler]

On June 23, the abeyance expired.

On June 26, the ATF/DOJ moved to extend the abeyance.

On June 27, the plaintiffs (including TX, but led by GOA) responded opposing the abeyance.

[Euler]

On June 23 in appellate court, meanwhile, the ATF/DOJ moved to extend the abeyance another 60 days.

On June 25, the court granted the motion.

[John Q Public]

and on it goes forever...

[JTHunter]

On 6/30/2025 at 11:38 AM, John Q Public said:

and on it goes forever...

 

Yeah, they made a movie about this many years ago.  It was called "The Never Ending Story". 

[Euler]

On July 1 in district court, the judge granted the motion to extend the abeyance though August 22.

[Euler]

On August 22 in appellate court, the ATF filed a motion to extend the abeyance.

On August 29, plaintiffs filed a response opposing extension.