Last year, Gun Owners of America (GOA) and other plaintiffs won a court victory over the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) unconstitutional final rule redefining who is “engaged in the business” of selling firearms.
The rule, pushed under the Biden Administration, was one more attempt to bring the country closer to so-called “universal” background checks. Now, Biden holdovers at the DOJ are attempting to stall the case by filing a motion asking for a stay, which could delay a resolution for an indefinite period of time.
In response, GOA, Gun Owners Foundation (GOF), and the states of Texas, Louisiana, Utah, and Mississippi have filed an opposition to the DOJ’s motion, arguing that a stay in the ruling could harm gun owners across the nation.
“To say there is a ‘fair possibility’ that a stay here will work damage to ‘someone else’ is an understatement,” the court document, filed on February 25, stated. “While Plaintiffs here have the benefit of a standing preliminary injunction against the unlawful Rule, millions of law-abiding gun owners do not. This includes the citizens of 46 states not covered by this Court’s injunction.”
Also in the response, GOA and the Texas Attorney General’s office made it clear that the DOJ’s request to stay the case only serves to further entrench the issue in a “quagmire of administrative process and serial litigation.” Additionally, as the case is now on the brink of resolution, the DOJ’s actions seek to prolong the legal uncertainty, making it harder for gun owners to defend their rights.
“We’ve already won a preliminary victory in the lower court, and the DOJ’s attempt to now stay the case is nothing but a delay tactic,” Erich Pratt, GOA senior vice president, senior Vice President of GOA, said in a news release. “A stay risks entrenching this case in an endless cycle of bureaucracy, and we’re not going to let that happen. The judge in our case issued a strong preliminary ruling, and it’s time to move forward—no more stalling.”
Pratt and others are calling for President Donald Trump’s new attorney general, Pam Bondi, to handle the situation.
“We encourage Attorney General Pam Bondi to put the right people in charge of handling these critical cases,” Pratt said. “DOJ bureaucrats are standing in the way of justice, and it’s time to make sure the right people are held accountable.”
Sam Paredes, speaking for the GOF, said career bureaucrats entrenched within the DOJ are causing the problem and need to be removed.
“While we attempted to resolve this behind the scenes, it’s clear that career bureaucrats in the DOJ have made the wrong decision,” Paredes said. “We’re calling out this misconduct, and we want to put the spotlight on those responsible for blocking the victory we’ve achieved. President Trump said he would ‘rip up’ this unlawful Rule, and so it’s inexplicable why the DOJ is now standing in the way of the court being able to do just that.”
Ultimately, the GOA response calls on the court to deny the DOJ’s motion for a stay.
“Because Defendants have not met their heavy burden showing this case should ‘depart from the beaten track,’ Plaintiffs ask the Court to deny Defendants’ motion,” the response concluded.
More house cleaning needed at the D O J. Send them on their way today not tomorrow.
Seems the simplest solution is for Bondi to issue a directive throughout DOJ to end/withdraw from all firearms litigation initiated by the department.
DOJ knows all the lawsuits in progress under its jurisdiction; simply move to dismiss. Lawsuits against the DOJ concerning firearms can be reviewed in less than a day (a week in fed bureaucrat time), and DOJ can immediately withdraw from those suits as well. This latter may result in financial cost to DOJ, but it is more costly to continue.
“Seems the simplest solution is for Bondi to issue a directive throughout DOJ to end/withdraw from all firearms litigation initiated by the department. ”
If that happens we are left with ‘preliminary injunctions’ that protects a few (relatively) in certain district court jurisdictions and no firm resolution for the rest of the country. This leaves the door open for more abuse by radical let wing judges in other districts.
What a better choice would be is for the government to concede in cases and cite they were wrong (i.e. on things like ‘in the business’) thus leaving a court with the only decision in favor of the other side. Or, in appeal to SCOTUS government to concede in cases and cite they were wrong thus leaving SCOTUS (even the liberal justices) with the only decision in favor of the other side thus setting precedent. But this has its pitfalls too.
DOJ should rotate, and become advocate for removing all restrictions on firearms. Even the billionaires funding the Dims cannot financially compete with the US govt.
Shall Not Be Infringed.
The Department of Justice isn’t very just.
A couple of nights ago the democRat Party clearly displayed its colors and they are not Red, White and Blue. Now the sick ratbassturds are doubling down on stupid…Attributes of a party in love with Gun Control an Agenda History Confirms is Rooted in Racism and Genocide.
Bondi is new to the job, and I have no doubt her plate is overflowing. Maybe the stay is simply to allow her time to get up to speed and order a dismissal be filed.
Civil War? Part One.
https://townhall.com/columnists/marklewis/2025/03/06/civil-war-part-one-n2653384
The nation has been involved in a civil war since the founding. One faction declared individuals cannot intelligently manage their own affairs, and another faction insists people can do so. On top of that, as a nation, we have always wanted a monarch that can be overthrown without physical force.
IIRC, only the US was not founded under a king, or dictator; makes so many off the chart crazy.
“More house cleaning needed at the D O J.“
Trump’s hand-picked Attorney General Pam Bondi has expressed her thoughts about house cleaning in the past:
“I’ve had my solicitor general on it for three days now working on it. We’ve been rewriting it, and we’re going to bring in something called the gun violence restraining order. … What we want to do is let law enforcement come in and take the guns.”
“Without being adjudicated, they are a danger to themselves … We also have to give the mentally ill due process. What we’re going to do is take the guns when they’re taken into custody or into the hospital and then when they’re released in 24 hours or 72 hours to determine whether they should give those guns back.”
You agree with Trump that Bondi was the right pick. Closet MAGA? It’s okay to come out. We’ll accept you.
“You agree with Trump that Bondi was the right pick“
Where do you get this stuff?
I made one comment:
“Trump’s hand-picked Attorney General Pam Bondi has expressed her thoughts about house cleaning in the past”
No agreement, no approval, my estimation is that Trump approves of her advocacy for “taking the guns first, worrying about due process later” as expressed in her statement quoted above.
I’m guessing he appointed her because she blocked Trump University lawsuits in Florida, for which his Trump foundation illegally made a political donation to her campaign:
“Donald Trump’s second-choice pick for attorney general, Pam Bondi, in 2013 received from Trump a $25,000 donation for a political action committee supporting her campaign to be re-elected as Florida’s attorney general — just days after a Bondi spokesperson told the media that her office was reviewing a lawsuit brought by New York’s attorney general on behalf of numerous students who said they were defrauded by Trump’s unaccredited real estate school, Trump University“
Nothing like illegal campaign contributions in order to corruptly block citizens’ lawsuits against Trump University fraud.
Remember, you voted for this.
“Where do you get this stuff?”
I guess I misunderstood you. It seemed like you were saying that you agreed with Bondi. So you’re against red flag laws? Wow! I’m proud of you, Miner. Welcome to the team!
“Remember, you voted for this.”
I know! Isn’t it wonderful?
If said donation was illegal, Trump would have been charged with it. The Dems have tried to pin everything but murder and jaywalking on him so if they thought they had the slightest chance of convincing a jury they would have charged him.
You don’t believe peoples’ positions can change over time? What’s her position now?