Defense Distributed v Blanche - Frame & Receiver rule

[Yeti]

Ruling in the USDC for the Northern District of TX says that rules around converting a hunk of metal or plastic into a firearm are unconstitutionally vague and right to make or repair firearms is being infringed for the Plaintiffs.  Not applicable in IL yet but another straw that will help to eventually "break the back" of the gun control regs the "people controllers" love to impose on us.  Links to the ruling and a better description of the ruling/impact than I can provide:

 

Vanderstock_2A_Victory.pdf

 

 

[Yeti]

And another overview from the SAF:

 

SAF WIN: JUDGE RULES BIDEN ERA ATF FRAME AND RECEIVER RULE UNCONSTITUTIONAL - Second Amendment Foundation

 

In April 2022, under the Biden administration, the ATF published its Rule amending the regulatory definition of “firearm” to encompass partially manufactured firearm frames and receivers. In seeking to regulate these “non-firearm objects” the ATF’s Rule impermissibly infringed on the Second Amendment’s protection of the right to personally manufacture and gunsmith firearms, as well as establishing a convoluted and opaque set of non-exclusive “factors” that informed when an inert piece of raw material became a “firearm” under federal law. The court declared the rule unconstitutional as applied to all SAF members and issued a permanent injunction protecting Defense Distributed and current and future Second Amendment Foundation members as it relates to the specific gun kits involved in the case. SAF and its partners filed for a motion summary judgment in April of this year, which today, the Court granted.

[Yeti]

Controlling Comrades at Everytown shockingly disagree with the ruling and seem to indicate that “ghost guns” are scarier again:

 

https://www.yahoo.com/news/politics/articles/judge-sides-defense-distributed-over-203900523.html