Posted: 8/18/2026 12:28:15 PM EDT
|
Moar winning! (sort of, limited scope). Join SAF (I'm already a member). https://saf.org/join-saf/  BREAKING: Another HUGE 2A WIN - Federal Judge STRIKES AT ATF’s “Ghost Gun” Rule AI recap of the video. This video reports on a major legal win for Second Amendment rights in a federal district court in Texas. The case, Defense Distributed and Second Amendment Foundation v. Attorney General Todd Blanch, concerns the ATF's 2022 frame-and-receiver rule. The presiding judge, Judge Reed O'Connor, issued a permanent injunction blocking the enforcement of key parts of this rule against the plaintiffs and members of the Second Amendment Foundation. Key Takeaways from the Ruling Constitutional Protection for Gunsmithing: The court ruled that the act of making or repairing one's own firearms is conduct protected by the Second Amendment. The judge noted that there is a long historical tradition of Americans manufacturing their own arms for personal use (12:25 - 14:48). Void for Vagueness: The judge also found that the ATF rule violates the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause because it is too vague. The regulation's definition of when an item becomes a "regulated firearm" was described by the court as essentially devolving into "guesswork and intuition" (6:04 - 8:54). Scope of the Injunction: The ruling is not a nationwide vacatur of the entire ATF rule. The declaratory relief and permanent injunction specifically protect Defense Distributed, the Second Amendment Foundation, and its current or future members from the enforcement of 27 CFR 478.11 and 478.12(c) regarding specific products like the M1911 80% frames, G80 build kits, and associated unfinished receivers (16:37 - 19:20). Historical Context The court rejected the government's attempt to use historical analogies (like barrel-proofing or gunpowder storage laws) to justify the regulation, noting that those historical laws were based on product safety rather than the crime-control and tracing purposes of the current ATF rule (10:48 - 12:15). The judge emphasized that colonial Americans frequently manufactured their own firearms, a practice that was vital to the nation's founding Edit - Note, this is on a very limited amount of products, ot all or any 80% frame. The declaratory relief and permanent injunction specifically protect Defense Distributed, the Second Amendment Foundation, and its current or future members from the enforcement of 27 CFR 478.11 and 478.12(c) regarding specific products like the M1911 80% frames, G80 build kits, and associated unfinished receivers |
I just made an update, it is a very limited scope of products from Defense Distributed.  The declaratory relief and permanent injunction specifically protect Defense Distributed, the Second Amendment Foundation, and its current or future members from the enforcement of 27 CFR 478.11 and 478.12(c) regarding specific products like the M1911 80% frames, G80 build kits, and associated unfinished receivers |
|
Quoted: I suppose this only applies in TX. Edit- on second reading it is not nationwide. Why do leftist judges rulings always apply to the whole country? |
| I would be interested in knowing how it really clashes with state policy. If a state says you can't have one of those particular 80% frames, but you are a covered member, it seems like the 2A basis would override the state law. At the end of the video he says state law still applies, but that does not track to me. State law can't override the Constitution. |
|
Quoted: Moar winning! (sort of, limited scope). Join SAF (I'm already a member). https://saf.org/join-saf/  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-WD6SZUcHakAI recap of the video. This video reports on a major legal win for Second Amendment rights in a federal district court in Texas. The case, Defense Distributed and Second Amendment Foundation v. Attorney General Todd Blanch, concerns the ATF's 2022 frame-and-receiver rule. The presiding judge, Judge Reed O'Connor, issued a permanent injunction blocking the enforcement of key parts of this rule against the plaintiffs and members of the Second Amendment Foundation. Key Takeaways from the Ruling Constitutional Protection for Gunsmithing: The court ruled that the act of making or repairing one's own firearms is conduct protected by the Second Amendment. The judge noted that there is a long historical tradition of Americans manufacturing their own arms for personal use (12:25 - 14:48). Void for Vagueness: The judge also found that the ATF rule violates the Fifth Amendment's Due Process Clause because it is too vague. The regulation's definition of when an item becomes a "regulated firearm" was described by the court as essentially devolving into "guesswork and intuition" (6:04 - 8:54). Scope of the Injunction: The ruling is not a nationwide vacatur of the entire ATF rule. The declaratory relief and permanent injunction specifically protect Defense Distributed, the Second Amendment Foundation, and its current or future members from the enforcement of 27 CFR 478.11 and 478.12(c) regarding specific products like the M1911 80% frames, G80 build kits, and associated unfinished receivers (16:37 - 19:20). Historical Context The court rejected the government's attempt to use historical analogies (like barrel-proofing or gunpowder storage laws) to justify the regulation, noting that those historical laws were based on product safety rather than the crime-control and tracing purposes of the current ATF rule (10:48 - 12:15). The judge emphasized that colonial Americans frequently manufactured their own firearms, a practice that was vital to the nation's founding Edit - Note, this is on a very limited amount of products, ot all or any 80% frame. The declaratory relief and permanent injunction specifically protect Defense Distributed, the Second Amendment Foundation, and its current or future members from the enforcement of 27 CFR 478.11 and 478.12(c) regarding specific products like the M1911 80% frames, G80 build kits, and associated unfinished receivers @panthermark thanks for being a member of SAF. We appreciate it! That is accurate. Quoted: I suppose this only applies in TX. Edit- on second reading it is not nationwide. Why do leftist judges rulings always apply to the whole country? It applies to SAF members. It is not limited to Texas. No different than the injunctive relief in the NFA cases. This is not legal advice but my reading of it is that: As it relates to the relief itself obviously the injunctive relief is specific to the enforcement of the regulations as to the specified products. But the declaratory relief applies to SAF members at large as to the convoluted regulation itself. Essentially it puts things back to the pre-regulation status quo for SAF members. |
|
So a ghost gun is one that was manufactured, presumably for personal use, without a serial number, right? Am I missing something? Now exactly how many crimes have been solved because of a serial number? Don’t get me wrong, I’m sure it’s happened. But let’s be real. If it was stolen, what good does the serial number do? May help it be recovered by the rightful owner. But someone steals a gun, gets into a gang fight and throws the gun over a fence. Does the serial number help find the hood? I’m sure it could help seal up a case where someone kills their significant other, as it shows it wasn’t some random gun. But I’m sorry, the serial number isn’t making or breaking that case. I dunno, what am I missing? I do understand, as MI is a registration state (oh, I mean purchase record, cough cough) that ghost guns mean avoiding registration. But again, what good does that list do? Again, yes I’m sure there’s a case or two where a serial number led them to a mass murderer. But serials to me are really more about tracking for the manufacturer and owner. |
|
Quoted: So a ghost gun is one that was manufactured, presumably for personal use, without a serial number, right? Am I missing something? Now exactly how many crimes have been solved because of a serial number? Don't get me wrong, I'm sure it's happened. But let's be real. If it was stolen, what good does the serial number do? May help it be recovered by the rightful owner. But someone steals a gun, gets into a gang fight and throws the gun over a fence. Does the serial number help find the hood? I'm sure it could help seal up a case where someone kills their significant other, as it shows it wasn't some random gun. But I'm sorry, the serial number isn't making or breaking that case. I dunno, what am I missing? I do understand, as MI is a registration state (oh, I mean purchase record, cough cough) that ghost guns mean avoiding registration. But again, what good does that list do? Again, yes I'm sure there's a case or two where a serial number led them to a mass murderer. But serials to me are really more about tracking for the manufacturer and owner. Sounds like the gov hates people that make their own firearms. |
|
Quoted: Is that what caused all the 80% kits to disappear? Pretty much… after P80 declared bankruptcy due to .gov prosecutions in several different states, nobody was willing to go to bat making anything related to build your own stuff except the guys making them in Israel, which weren’t as good as the original P80 series. |
