Letter to the Hon. Marvin G. Richardson, Acting Director Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives - Raising Alarm Over Proposed Rules Jeopardizing Americans' Second Amendment Rights

Letter

Dear Acting Director Richardson:

Over the last month, ATF has proposed two rules with far-reaching implications for
Americans' Second Amendment rights. On May 21, ATF announced Proposed Rule 2021R--05,
Definition of "Frame or Receiver" and Identification of Firearms. This rule covers a breadth of
issues, including the classification of split or modular frames and receivers, the identification of
mufflers and silencers, and so forth, many of which will have implications for law-abiding
firearms manufacturers who have worked faithfully to comply with existing laws. But most
importantly, this Proposed Rule would take a significant step toward a national gun registry by
requiring FFL dealers to maintain personal gun owner information and records of transactions
involving firearms, including their makes, models, and serial numbers--forever.

And that wasn't all. On June 10, ATF issued Proposed Rule 2021R--08, Factoring
Criteria for Firearms With Attached "Stabilizing Braces." This proposed rule would reverse
years of interpretive guidance and recategorize millions of pistols and AR-15-style firearms as
"short-barreled rifles," placing them under the strict regulatory scheme of the National Firearms
Act and making it a federal felony to otherwise possess them. Indeed, the Proposed Rule states
that it "may affect upwards of 1.4 million individuals."

These measures are concerning enough on their face. But more alarming is ATF's apparent
willingness to unilaterally make important firearms policy determinations wholly apart from
Congress. Americans' rights to keep and bear firearms are safeguarded by the Second
Amendment, and the responsibility for implementing those constitutional protections rests with
elected lawmakers--not unelected federal bureaucrats.

Accordingly, please provide my office with responses to the following questions no later than
June 25, 2021:

1. In the past, firearms product manufacturers have been repeatedly informed that many of
the products they sell, including "receiver blanks" that have not yet been fully machined,
are not considered "firearms" by ATF. Accordingly, significant reliance interests have
vested. Will ATF continue to honor those prior determinations, including those pertaining
to products currently on the market?
2. What steps does ATF intend to take to ensure that any new information that would be
retained by FFL dealers pursuant to Proposed Rule 2021R--05 is not subsequently used
for the targeting of lawful gun owners by federal authorities or other politically-motivated
purposes?
3. What, if any, new measures does ATF anticipate taking to enforce the terms of Proposed
Rule 2021R--08 against private gun owners?
4. Proposed Rule 2021R--08 states that it "will not have substantial direct effects on the
States, the relationship between the Federal Government and the States, or the
distribution of power and responsibilities among the various levels of government." This
claim stands in tension with the fact that numerous states and other jurisdictions have
passed Second Amendment sanctuary laws in response to perceived federal overreach.
Why were these many laws not considered relevant to a federalism analysis in the course
of developing Proposed Rule 2021R--08?
5. What measures, if any, does ATF intend to take to attempt to enforce the terms of
Proposed Rule 2021R--08 in jurisdictions subject to Second Amendment sanctuary laws?

Thank you for your attention to these important matters. I look forward to receiving your
prompt responses to these questions.