so the ATF just suffered a significant loss their pistol brace rule was just struck down in its entirety and it was vacated Nationwide the entire rule was struck down so we need to talk about what just happened with this huge decision now really quick before we jump this video I want to ask you all for a huge favor looking at some of my analytics about 60% of all my viewers are not actually subscribed to the channel so if you want to support this channel if you want this type of 2A information to get out to more people please consider subscribing to the channel but regardless I really appreciate all of your guys’ support we’ve reached over 700,000 subscribers which I would have never imagined and I just want to thank you guys so much for all of your support now as I mentioned in the intro in this video we’re going to be talking about the pistol brace rule this is something that’s been developing since this rule was passed this is something that’s been challenged in multiple cases in multiple federal courts and now we have our first final merits decision this decision is coming out of the mock V Garland case this is a case that was filed and fought for by Farms policy Coalition and this is a huge win the entire rule was vacated which means it was found invalid and struck down in its entirety so the pistol brace rule as of right now is no more and has been vacated Nationwide you may be asking yourself how does this impact you and really the status quo of things doesn’t change drastically because keep in mind there were already a bunch of cases that were being litig ated this mock case as well where there were original preliminary Junctions which are a little bit more temporary forms of relief those preliminary injunctions were granted and they were protecting um some of those organizations like FPC saf Goa and others it was protecting those organizations and their members and then you also had the brdo case where you had a nationwide preliminary injunction and again that protected everybody Nationwide but those were temporary forms of relief here in this case it’s a final marriage decision and a vac of the entire brace Rule and again final Merit decision which is huge which means now this case will proceed forward even if it goes to the fifth circuit it will proceed forward on a merriage decision ultimately probably leading the path back to the Supreme Court now this decision comes again in that mock V Garland case and it was issued by the amazing judge judge Reed o Conor judge OK Conor has issued a lot of favorable decisions before not just in the pistol brace issue but the vanderock frames and receivers case and other cases as well and once again he’s issued a huge decision striking down the pistol brace rule one of the things that the ATF was trying to do in this lawsuit is they were claiming that although the fist circuit had already reviewed the mock V Garland case and find that there was a likelihood of success on the merits and that the APA here the administrative procedures Act was violated by the ATF because remember the ATF has to follow the APA when they promate these types of rules they had that notice of proposed rule making that was the first kind of draft they put forward of their pistol brace Rule and you may remember that at that time we were talking about how the ATF had this whole worksheet and it was this report card system where they had Point systems that you would add up and that would help you determine maybe when a firearm with a brace attached to it would then be an SBR and not a pistol they had that whole worksheet that was in the proposed rule but then when we got the final rule by the ATF all of a sudden that worksheet was gone now when this case was moving through the process what ended up happening is all the cours that reviewed this said that the ATF V violated the APA because it did not follow the logical outgrowth test essentially because the ATF scrapped the worksheet system and then went to a more arbitrary and capricious kind of just um intent-based analysis and just this vague broad analysis where the ATF gets to determine on their own what would make something in SBR with a brace attached to it that violated the APA so when the pimary Junctions were first reviewed it was found to be a violation of the APA and now once again on the fin marage decision they found that yes the ATF did violate the APA that this is not following the logical outgrowth test and therefore the entire brace rule must be vacated another thing that I want to note is that this lawsuit here is not a pure Second Amendment challenge so I know some people will say you know that the brace rule was struck down in its entirety because it was deemed unconstitutional or a violation of the Second Amendment that’s not necessarily true there were some Second Amendment arguments that were made in this lawsuit but the courts never reached a decision and definitely not a final Merit decision based purely on the Second Amendment it was more purely on the procedural aspect the APA claims that were brought in these lawsuits now one of the other interesting things that happened in this final decision by judge o Conor was the fact that the ATF for a while in this lawsuit suddenly tried to argue that issuing an injunction a plinary injunction or vacating the entire rule or doing some sort of relief would violate the AIA essentially violate a tax requirement where you would be avoiding the tax paying the NFA tax and that essentially any type of relief would be barred here judge OK Conor got around that he stated in the decision that the court notes that the defendants do not and cannot claim that the plaintiff’s procedural and constitutional challenges to the final rule are barred by the AIA rather as evidence by their arguments defendants challenge the pl’s ability to seek preemptive injunctive relief there are meaningful differences between an injunction which is a drastic and extraordinary remedy and vacature which is a less drastic remedy accordingly because as discussed in this decision the court is vacating the final Rule and is not granting plaintiff’s request for a permanent injunction plaintiff’s arguments are Moot and the court need not address whether the requested injunctive relief is barred by the AIA so there you’re seeing judge o Conor get around the AIA arguments of the ATF saying the AIA only applies to injunctions I’m not granting a permanent injunction in this decision I’m granting a vacature of the entire rule which is different and that’s why the AIA does not apply and that’s why the whole NFA tax requirement is not applying in this case he then goes on to say that this pistol brace rule here in this case is invalid and must be struck down in its entirety and must be vacated because again it violates the logical outgrowth test now really what judge o Conor does here in this section and really in the entire decision is he just rejects all of the atf’s arguments that he shouldn’t follow what the fist circuit did that the fist circuit you know really when they first reviewed mock was on a more limited evidentiary record that the arguments weren’t fully developed and therefore he shouldn’t follow the whole logical outgrowth analysis he says no the fist circuit when they first reviewed mock did a thorough job they really looked at this issue and found that the ATF violated The Logical outgrow test that they scrapped the worksheet went to this more vague and arbitrary process and that violates the APA and therefore this must be shuck down he States in this section that the court declines to relitigate a determination made by the fif circuit in this case here the court declines the defendant’s invitation to relitigate this issue and once again adopts the majority’s well-reasoned conclusion as its own consequently the court finds that the final rule violated the apa’s procedural requirements because it was not a logical outgrowth of the proposed rule accordingly plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is granted and defendants motion for summary judgment is denied as to to the issue now here is also something very important of course they’re they’re adopting what the fth ccet already said as far as a violation of The Logical outgrowth but then there was a question about okay what form of relief would judge OK Conor Grant there were a few options he had mentioned that he could Grant a permanent injunction which is a little bit more drastic essentially permanently barring the ATF from ever doing anything like this ever again or he could just simply vacate the rule and then remand it you know for the ATF to do something again what ultimately happened here is that he vacated the entire rule so the rule is no more it’s found a violation of the APA but the ATF isn’t necessarily barred from going back to the drawing board and trying to issue maybe a new proposed rule a new Final rule that is maybe consistent with the APA again he’s not addressing whether or not this type of rule would violate the Second Amendment or if it’s just unconstitutional at large simply what he’s saying here is that the ATF messed up the process again a little bit less drastic of a decision but still it’s vacating the entire pistol brace Rule now you may be asking yourself again how does this apply directly to you this is a decision which impacts everybody in the United States you know the 10 to 20 million pistol brace owners this impacts everybody essentially this is a vacature of the entire rule so as of right now as we sit right now the pistol brace rule is no more now even the caveat with that is the fact that we already had some injunctions protecting people and then we also had the Nationwide preliminary injunction in the brittle case so does the status quo really change drastically because of this no not necessarily but this was still a May’s decision which is huge the other caveat to this is the fact that we all know that the ATF will appeal this up to the fiz Circuit once again they will try their hand once again at the fif circuit they will cry that the lower court here judge o Conor got this analysis incorrect that he did the wrong thing and therefore the fist circuit should reverse also in the intrum kind of in the meantime they’re probably going to ask for an administrative stay of this ruling um put a halt on that Nationwide vacature and then there’s also a couple more additional wrinkles right now the circuit has Consolidated all the preliminary injunction reviews of these pistol brace cases the mock case the brdo case the Goa case all those cases are set to be heard around the August 15th date uh what’s likely now going to happen because we have a final merriage decision in the mock case is some of those are also probably to get moved around and then also keep in mind we have a ton of Supreme Court decisions dealing directly with the ATF with the atf’s bump stock ban that Cargo Case dealing with the Vander stock case all of those decisions are set to come but the general takeaway of this is that the pistol brace rule has been vacated in its entirety that’s a huge win this is a final Merit decision which is huge so big shout out to FPC go support them they’re an amazing organization so if you like this video and you like support the channel one of the best ways to do that is to like comment and subscribe all those things help to Fu the algorithm and it signals to YouTube that you guys see value in these videos and in this type of 2A news but as always thank you all for watching watching don’t forget to like And subscribe and never forget this nation was built B Scholars and this nation will be maintained B Scholars [Music]
Video Tags: Armed Scholar,armed scholar,nysrpa v. bruen,nysrpa v. corlett date,NYSRPA v. Bruen,NYSRPA v. Corlett,NYSRPA oral arguments,nysrpa v. bruen oral arguments,supreme court new york gun,supreme court decision,atf proposed brace rule,atf brace ban,atf brace rules,pistol brace final rule,atf pistol braces,pistol brace ban 2022,supreme court firearms ruling,atf pistol brace rule,atf pistol brace update 2024,pistol brace rule update 2024,pistol brace rule
Video Duration: 00:10:43
