Three gun rights organizations sued the ATF over its about face decision to regulate pistol braces. After years of treating them like just another firearm accessory, the Biden administration (read: Susan Rice) commanded the regulatory agency to re-think its stance and treat AR, AK, and other pistols with braces as short-barrel rifles.
When the ATF’s new rule went into effect, the Second Amendment Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition, and Gun Owners of America sued to block the sudden change that made felons out of millions of Americans who legally bought braces. Injunctions were then issued blocking ATF enforcement for the members of those three organizations.
The NRA apparently felt left out. They wanted their four million or so members to have the same protection against enforcement while the matter is decided, so they petitioned the court that’s hearing the SAF suit to join as an additional plaintiff.
Yesterday, however, Judge Jayne J. Boyle denied their motion.
For intervention as of right, the NRA’s motion fails on two independent grounds. First, the Court finds the NRA’s application for intervention is not timely. Second, the Court finds the NRA’s interests are adequately represented by the current Plaintiffs.
The judge wasn’t buying the NRA’s claim that they were somehow surprised by the injunction she issued that protected the named plaintiffs including SAF members.
The NRA contends that it only became aware of its interest in this case after the Fifth Circuit and this Court issued preliminary injunctions limited to the plaintiffs in the respective cases. … But that argument ignores both the particulars of this case and the rarity of nationwide injunctions. In essence, the NRA argues it was caught off guard when the Court failed to issue an extraordinary remedy that Plaintiffs never asked for.
And then there’s this . . .
On those facts alone, it is hard to conclude that the NRA’s Motion to Intervene is timely. But the unusual circumstances of this case further militate against such a finding. Specifically, despite knowing of the Rule and Plaintiffs’ limited injunction request, the NRA only sought to intervene once this Court granted Plaintiffs’ motion for preliminary injunction pending the Fifth Circuit appeal in Mock. To find intervention timely under these circumstances would seemingly incentivize “injunction shopping” among putative intervenors seeking to challenge agency actions. Under such a standard, intervenors would be wise to wait and watch as cases challenging agency actions percolated through the district courts.
In short, Judge Boyle told the NRA to buzz off.
The Second Amendment Foundation, not being ones to let grass grow under their feet, saw the denial as an opportunity and extended an invitation to NRA members to also become members of SAF…for all the obvious reasons. They’ve issued this announcement . . .
The federal judge presiding over a Second Amendment Foundation challenge to the Biden administration’s new arm brace rule has denied a request by the National Rifle Association to intervene in an effort to get the same protections for its members as SAF members have been granted.
However, the order denying NRA’s intervention does not mean NRA members are out of luck, said SAF founder and Executive Vice President Alan M. Gottlieb. They can join SAF and be covered under the judge’s ruling issued last month. The case is known as SAF, et.al. v. ATF, et. al.
“While we’re certain NRA members are disappointed,” Gottlieb said, “by joining SAF they can get the protection of the judge’s ruling.”
SAF offers several different tiers of memberships, available at https://www.saf.org/join-saf/. Annual membership is $15, a five-year membership is $50 and a life membership is $150. Membership is effective upon date of receipt. For questions regarding membership, please contact [email protected].
In her ruling, U.S. District Judge Jane J. Boyle wrote, “For intervention as of right, the NRA’s motion fails on two independent grounds. First, the Court finds the NRA’s application for intervention is not timely. Second, the Court finds the NRA’s interests are adequately represented by the current Plaintiffs…In sum, the NRA knew of the Rule more than a year before it moved to intervene, and the NRA had no basis to assume a nationwide injunction would be issued in this case. Moreover, allowing an intervention under these circumstances risks incentivizing opportunistic “injunction shopping” under the auspices of “timely” interventions to protect a threatened interest. The NRA’s Motion is not timely.”
SAF is joined in the case 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, Texas.
“We will definitely welcome any NRA members wanting to join SAF,” said Executive Director Adam Kraut.
So if you’re an NRA member who owns a pistol brace, joining SAF seems like the obvious move. There’s nothing that prevents you from being a member of both gun rights orgs and a SAF membership will protect you from the ATF, at least until the case is finally resolved. What are you waiting for?
