Im 1/3 of the way through a twitter thread on VanDerStock v Garland and the AI decided im an ‘automated account’. Blatant censorship.

Ill finish it there as i can. In the meantime, enjoy it here FIRST! ⤵️⤵️

So last night, Firearms Policy Coalition @gunpolicy scored a MASSIVE victory over the ATF & #illegitimate Biden Regime. Last night, the US Northern District of TX Federal Court ruled that the ATF’s ‘frame & receiver’ so-called ‘rule’ was NULL & VOID. Let’s dive into this exciting case and its implications!

This case primarly was a plaintiff, Jennifer VanDerStock represented by FPC in a lawsuit to challenge the ATF’s rule stating that 80% frames & receivers that are pejoratively called ‘Ghost Guns’ by the anti-gun extremists & the Left. They are only 80% machined & require the buyer to perform the remaining 20% machining to turn into a gun.

This is a key distinction—
Biden himself famously committed a felony by possessing a Polymer80 made 80% Glock frame & jig and complete slide kit. Within the DC city limits, possession is a Felony. Fast forward to the 23 second mark in this video to see Joe Biden commit a felony.
https://youtu.be/HufRBQjGLuw

Several people reached out to the ATF and the US Secret Service including @emilymiller asking how this kit was acquired, who smuggled it into the white house and who gave it to Joe Biden for his PR stunt, but none of these agencies returned repeated emails or calls. But I digress, let’s move on!

The #illegitimate Biden White House was taking a LOT of heat for Biden’s failure to force gun bans through congress & the pressure resulting in Biden’s handlers ordering ATF to simply CREATE new laws that they called ‘rules’ to ban/restrict the items at the top of the anti-gun enterprise’s list: Bump Stocks, 80% frames & receivers (ghost guns) & Pistol Braces.

Bump stocks were famously backdoor banned by then President Donald Trump after the horrific Las Vegas rampage killing. He did so by directing the ATF to reclassify them as machine guns, even though they are NOT mechanically anything like a machine gun and unilaterally change the law to add them to the National Firearms Act that requires govt registry of Machine Guns.
https://t.co/1JnNIpw7wV

The NFA, passed in 1935, says that to own a machine gun, or a suppressor, or a short-barreled rifle or shotgun, you must register it with the Federal Government (ATF) & pay a $200 tax for a govt-provided stamp authorizing you to possess/own it. From here on I’ll refer to this as the NFA.
https://t.co/Hr85SBMExv

Back in the ‘30’s, this was a huge financial road block and took these items out of the reach of ordinary citizens. Because of devaluation of US Currency and inflation that’s not so anymore. But many people balk at registering anything with the government. In light of FBI and DOJ abuses that have become public can you blame them? After reading the durham report and multiple DOJ OIG reports i dont blame them at all. Especially after watching the current Witch Hunt of Donald Trump.

So what does that have to do with VanDerStock v Garland? I’m glad you asked that! The bumpstock ban was the FIRST action of the three where ATF simply REWROTE the 1968 gun control act that redefines what machine guns, frames and receivers, completed guns, gun parts, etc are. In very technical terms & language congress spelled out what these things are.

The bump stock ban, and now under Joe Biden the ban on 80% frames/receivers, and on Pistol Braces followed the same methodology: The ATF abused and exceeded Chevron Deference Inferred powers to REWRITE what these things are.

The ATF had to change the definition of a machine gun in its ‘determination’ of what they are in order to write new ‘rules’ dictating who could possess them and how. These ‘rules’ came with criminal penalties for anyone who didn’t follow ATF’s new rules.

Chevron Deference is a legal doctrine that originates from a US Supreme Court ruling in Chevron USA v Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc in 1984. The US SCOTUS set forth a legal test as to when the court should defer to the agency’s answer or interpretation, holding that such judicial deference is appropriate where the agency’s answer was not unreasonable, so long as Congress had not spoken directly to the precise issue at question.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/chevron_deference

This of critical importance: Chevron Deference says if the law is vague, the court hearing a lawsuit will find for the Agency as the Agency is most qualified to interpret any vagueness of the law. This, THIS, is the pretext the ATF and the EPA have been using to FAR exceed their authority, writing laws from scratch from tortured revised versions of laws already on the books.

Primarily, the National Firearms Act of 1935, the Gun Control Act of 1968, the Clean Air Act of 1967, Clean Water Act of 1972. The EPA has lost two Supreme Court cases in three terms, West Virginia v EPA where it was held they unconstitutionally exceeded limits of Chevron to create PUNITIVE restrictions on coal plants & auto makers rewriting the Clean Air Act, and in Sackett v EPA where SCOTUS held EPA far exceeded Chevron Deference authority by illegally rewriting and expanding the Clean Waters Act.

West Virginia v EPA:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/20-1530

Sackett v EPA:
https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/22pdf/21-454_4g15.pdfEPA

Onto the ATF! Recently a Federal Court ruled the ATF’s expansion of the NFA to add bumpstocks illegally rewrote the NFA to add items. The NFA has specific technical language defining what a Machine Gun is—the ATF just rewrote the definition, told owners of bumpstocks under their new ‘rule’ (law made without congress) that they must file for & obtain a tax stamp, register them as machine guns or face 10 years in prison & a $250,000 fine. The 5th Circuit Court Of Appeals (COA) ruled against ATF.

Cargill v Garland:
https://fingfx.thomsonreuters.com/gfx/legaldocs/gdpzqwrjdvw/01062023cargill.pdf

This was the first shoe to drop. The ATF at the Biden White House & anti-gun enterprise extremist groups like ‘Moms Demand Action’ & ‘Everytown For Gun Safety’ & ‘Brady Group’ pressure illegally redefined bumpstocks & illegally added them to the NFA. The 5th Circuit COA ruled their bumpstock rule null & void as an illegal overreach on ATF’s part.

The decision on the VanDerStock v Garland case is the SECOND MAJOR SHOE to drop. In the Federal Court’s ruling, Judge Reed O’Conner ruled that the ATF illegally rewrote definitions clearly defined in the 1968 GCA just as ATF had done in Cargill v Garland. The ATF illegally rewrote the law by changing definitions to suit the Anti-Gun Agenda putting forth criminal penalties for makers, sellers and owners far exceeding their authority under Chevron Deference.