BELLEVUE, Wash. —— The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) has filed a federal lawsuit in Texas challenging the ban on firearms carry in U.S. Post Offices and on postal property as violations of the Second Amendment, and is seeking declaratory and injunctive relief.

Joining SAF is the Firearms Policy Coalition and two private citizens, Gavin Pate and George Mandry, both Texas residents. Named as the sole defendant is Attorney General Merrick Garland, in his official capacity. The complaint was filed in U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Fort Worth Division. Read more

Friday, in a case fully supported by Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the Gun Owners Foundation, the Supreme Court of the United States overturned the ATF’s 2018 ban on bump stocks. GOA had filed an amicus brief with the high court in this case, and previously filed their own separate challenge to the ban after meetings with the Trump Administration and lobbying efforts on Capitol Hill failed.

This onerous attempt by the ATF to re-classify bump stocks as machineguns was a clear misreading of the underlying federal law, as emphasized by the Justices in today’s opinion.

Erich Pratt, GOA’s Senior Vice President, issued the following statement:

“Today the Justices made crystal clear that the ATF went well beyond their statutory authority in promulgating this rule. While it’s a shame it took six years to right this wrong, GOA is nevertheless proud to have fought back since Day 1. And we will continue to do so anywhere there is illegal and unconstitutional gun control.” Read more

GW: Here is yet another anti-constitutional maneuver foiled. Private citizens once again foot the bill to thwart government’s monopoly-money tactics.

Late Tuesday, Gun Owners of America (GOA) and the Gun Owners Foundation (GOF) helped secure a preliminary injunction against Biden’s Universal Registration Check rule, which could require any person who sells just one gun in a year to obtain a Federal Firearms License and conduct background checks.

Under the judge’s order, the ATF may not enforce the new rule against members of GOA, the Tennessee Firearms Association, the Virginia Citizens Defense League, and residents of the States of Texas, Utah, Mississippi, and Louisiana.

The original rule took effect on May 20th, but GOA helped previously secure a partial Temporary Restraining Order blocking its enforcement against our members and certain other plaintiffs.

Erich Pratt, GOA’s Senior Vice President, issued the following statement:

“This is a massive victory for our members, and it comes at a crucial time. Before the rule even took effect, the ATF was involved in an early morning raid in Arkansas on a citizen’s home who was accused of not abiding by these rules, and ultimately, he ended up being killed. This Administration’s ceaseless aggression towards gun owners has already turned deadly, and the enforcement of this rule would have inevitably led to more unnecessary bloodshed. GOA and our valued partners will continue to fight back against this lawless and tyrannical administration.” Read more

Yesterday, following less than three hours of jury deliberations, Hunter Biden, the son of President Joe Biden, was found guilty by a federal court jury in Wilmington, Delaware of lying on a federal form. The form in question, the 4473 Firearms Transaction Record, is the same form that Second Amendment advocates say the president and the ATF have “weaponized” used to against gun dealers and purchasers. President Biden’s office issued a statement saying he “accepted the outcome of the case and would respect the judicial process” – adding- “as his son considers an appeal.”

Ironically, consideration of an appeal would be founded on the Supreme Court’s Bruen decision. The defense’s use of that argument, however, was insufficient to overcome testimony from Biden’s ex-wife, former girlfriend and widow of his brother, Beau, confirming that during the time when he lied on the Form 4473 in order to purchase a revolver, he was addicted to- and using- illegal drugs.

The federal charges against Hunter Biden focused on a form all gun owners are familiar with: the 4473 Firearms Transaction Record. It was question 11e that made Biden’s revolver purchase illegal.

Sentencing should take place within 120 days of a verdict, meaning Biden’s punishment should be announced before the November elections where his father will be seeking a second term.

Industry Response:

Mark Oliva, Managing Director, Public Affairs, NSSF

“……NSSF has been a consistent supporter of keeping guns out of the hands of those who should not possess them, whether that be a prohibited individual, an unsupervised child or someone suffering a mental health crisis. Hunter Biden’s admission that he was illegally using controlled substances and addicted to illicit drugs at the time of his firearm purchase clearly demonstrates that he was a prohibited individual at the time he purchased the firearm and lied on the ATF Form 4473 when he attested he was not using illicit drugs.

Alan Gottlieb, Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

“..At some point President Biden must reflect on his half-century of gun control extremism and acknowledge that none of the laws he championed prevented his son from illegally buying a gun and being convicted of the crime in a Delaware courtroom. Meanwhile, millions of American citizens, who have committed no crimes, are nevertheless penalized daily by the laws and regulations the president and his anti-run-rights allies have supported in the misguided belief they have the moral high ground. Today proved otherwise.”

Randy Kozuch, Executive Director, NRA Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA)

“The National Rifle Association has always stood for the lawful use and possession of firearms. Mr. Biden’s documented lifestyle choices at the time of purchasing a firearm made him a prohibited person under current law.”

BELLEVUE, Wash. —— The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has announced it will hear oral arguments in the Second Amendment Foundation’s (SAF) challenge of the “Final Rule” issued by the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) regarding arm braces for pistols, during the week of Aug. 5.

The case is known as SAF v. ATF and was filed in February 2023. SAF is joined by Rainier Arms, LLC and two private citizens, Samuel Walley and William Green. They are represented by attorney Chad Flores at Flores Law in Houston. Last August, SAF won, in part, a preliminary injunction in the case when a court panel decided 2-1 the rule was “likely illegal” because the government had violated the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) by adopting the rule without meaningful opportunity for public comment.

“We are delighted about the court’s decision,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “We will be fully prepared to argue our case before the appeals court, and hopefully see a quick resolution of this case.”

SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut noted the SAF case is part of a consolidation of four separate cases for briefing purposes, but still stands apart on separate issues.

“The ATF’s ‘Final Rule’ is a complete reversal of previous policy, and it was adopted in violation of APA guidelines.” Kraut said. “We certainly expect to prevail.” Read more

Gun Owners of America (GOA) issued the following statements after YouTube announced a formal change in their policies towards firearms related content:

“Restricting access to adults only—for content that depicts wholly legal and constitutionally-protected activity—is wrong, and it aims to push a sinister narrative to minors that firearms are evil,” said Erich Pratt, GOA’s Senior Vice President. “In turn, as younger generations come of age, they will not question or push back on further violations of our Second Amendment rights.”

“Alvin Bragg and his anti-gun friends have been aggressively pressuring YouTube to censor and directly prohibit certain content related to guns for years now, and sadly they just succeeded and free speech has once again become the victim,” said Aidan Johnston, GOA’s Director of Federal Affairs. “Congress must demand answers from YouTube on how influential DA Bragg and gun control groups were in facilitating this change in policy and determine whether the Biden Administration or it’s White House Office of Gun Control was weaponized to force the censorship of Second Amendment content.”

Background: This week, YouTube and parent company Google announced plans to change their policy on firearms related content – effective June 18th. Under the new policy, which will be retroactive and apply to all existing content on the platform, the following will apply:

• Content showing the use of homemade firearms, automatic firearms, and certain firearm accessories will be age restricted.
• Content showing how to remove “safety devices” will be banned.
• Firearms in movies, video games, military and police footage, and warzone footage will not categorically be age restricted—creating a double standard for Hollywood and anti-gun corporate media.

In April, Manhattan DA Alvin Bragg sent a letter to YouTube CEO Neil Mohan urging him to alter their algorithms to ensure that certain firearms content not be promoted. Additionally, he urged the company to directly censor and remove certain firearms-related content. Read more

The Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and its partners, in a long-running legal challenge of California’s one-gun-per-month (OMG) law, have filed an appellee’s brief with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in response to the state’s effort to keep the law in place.

SAF won a summary judgement at the district court level, but California appealed. The case was originally filed in December 2020.

SAF is joined by the Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc., San Diego County Gun Owners PAC, North County Shooting Center, Inc., PWGG, L.P., a limited partnership, and six private citizens including Michelle Nguyen, for whom the case Nguyen v. Bonta is named. They are represented by attorney Raymond M. DiGuiseppe of Southport, N.C.

“It should be clear to the court that the text of the Second Amendment covers the conduct prohibited by California’s OMG statute,” said SAF Executive Director Adam Kraut. “The state argues that it’s restriction should be considered ‘presumptively lawful’ when it is plainly an unlawful ban on the otherwise lawful purchasing activity of honest citizens who simply wish to exercise their constitutionally protected rights for lawful purposes.” Read more

BELLEVUE, Wash. —— Attorneys representing the Second Amendment Foundation (SAF) and two other West Coast gun rights organizations have filed an amicus brief with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the case of an Oregon man convicted of illegally transferring a machine gun.

SAF is joined in the brief by the California Rifle & Pistol Association (CRPA) and Second Amendment Law Center. They are not directly involved in the case, known as U.S. v. Daniel Matthew Kittson. The amicus urges the 9th Circuit to, at a minimum, remand the matter back to the district court “so it can conduct a proper historical review as required by Bruen,” which it did not do. SAF, CRPA and the Law Center are represented by attorneys Donald Kilmer in Caldwell, Idaho, and C.D. Michel, Joshua Robert Dale, Konstadinos T. Moros and Alexander A. Frank at Michel & Associates in Long Beach, California.

Kittson was convicted of trying to sell a Russian PPSh-41 machine gun. He is a convicted felon already, and has been sentenced to a term in federal prison. SAF and its partners contend such a conviction should be the result of deciding the case on the proper grounds.

“We are not defending Mr. Kittson or taking either side in this case,” said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. “Our interest is to insure the lower court conducts a historical analysis of the law as required under the Bruen decision. We are asking for a reversal of the court’s decision or a remand back to the district court for proper historical review.” Read more