Justice Department Tries to Dismiss Case Challenging ATF Abuses of FFLs

A gavel

In layman’s terms: The Justice Department is asking the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit to consider a challenge against its ATF abuses as moot.

As numerous legal actions continue to percolate, it seems as if it’s a roll of the dice to figure out which side of the Second Amendment the Pam Bondi Justice Department is on, with a move recently to dismiss a case against it as “moot.” Major gun rights groups disagree.

In a statement on X, Gun Owners Foundation boldly stated:

Without a permanent fix in court, the next President could EASILY re-instate this gun control. DOJ is ‘evading review’ & we will continue to fight!

In the case of Moorehouse v. ATF, brought jointly by a private plaintiff, Gun Owners of America and Gun Owners Foundation, the ATF recently filed a motion to dismiss the case as moot, citing their action of rescinding the “zero tolerance” policy under the Biden administration that cost hundreds of FFLs their ability to do business, and in some cases even criminal charges.

In their response to this motion in a filing on July 28, Gun Owners rightly pointed out that the case is not at all moot given that, “Defendants have now promulgated their fifth firearm license revocation policy in as many years. They claim that this one is ‘new and different,’ but never concede their prior policy was wrong, or even problematic.”

If the case is dismissed, there remains no legal mechanism to prevent future administrations from enacting such hostile policies in the future. The Gun Owners response in opposition to the motion to dismiss shows the path for future abuse is clear, stating, “…Defendants could simply adopt a ‘new and different’ policy anytime their actions were subjected to legal challenge.”

Just as important, from a legal perspective, the Justice Department has a burden to prove the case is moot, something that it has clearly not done in the eyes of the public, the FFLs, or even to the satisfaction of the interested parties.

First, mootness requires that Defendants make it “absolutely clear” that there is “no reasonable expectation” that the alleged violation will recur. Defendants equivocate, claiming that it is only “unlikely” they will reoffend in the future. And instead of seizing this opportunity to disavow their past conduct, Defendants demand “more leeway” because they are the government.

It is crystal clear to every gun owner that a future administration could reverse such policies and continue the abuse and weaponization of the ATF directed against lawful businesses.

This posture from the Justice Department is in stark contrast with the Executive Order from President Trump, issued on February 7, directing the Pam Bondi Justice Department to “…to assess any ongoing infringements of the Second Amendment rights of our citizens, and present a proposed plan of action to the President.”

Gun Owners are asking the Court to deny the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the case. The motion is now under consideration for the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit.

Readers of this publication will recognize that we’ve closely watched and tracked both the good and poorly regarded moves of the Justice Department under the Trump administration. This latest move will be added to our timeline and deserves a “thumbs down.”

While completely optional, we ask that you consider contributing to News2A’s independent, pro-Second Amendment journalism. If you feel we provide a valuable service, please consider participating in a value-for-value trade by clicking the button below. Whether you’d like to contribute on a one-time basis or a monthly basis, we graciously appreciate your support, no matter how big or how small. And if you choose not to contribute, you will continue to have full access to all content. Thank you!

Share this story

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
0 Comments
Newest
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedback
View all comments

They make it possible for us to bring you this content for free!

0
Tell us what you think!x
()
x