Transcription
Major breaking news as the ATF has just suffered a terrible blow at the hands of Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk down there in the Northern District of Texas. The engaged in business rule promulgated by the Joe Biden administration has gone bye-bye permanently. You heard me right, PERMANENTLY AND AS TO EVERYONE in America not just to the parties. We're going to break down the administrative procedure act, what just happened in favor of gun owners, and the vacatur notion, all of which you need to understand to realize what a huge win this was for the gun owners of America and Ken Paxton and many others including you and me. Let's break it down when we come right back.
>> [music] >> Hey folks, I'm Mark Smith, host of the Four Boxes Diner proud American gun owner, constitutional attorney member of the United States Supreme Court bar, and proud to say the top voice of the Second Amendment in America thank you 2025 and thank you 2026 Gunny's Awards.
All right, folks, this is a huge deal, huge deal. Federal District Court Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk down there in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas has just destroyed, killed, bye-bye, goodbye the Joe Biden engaged in business rule. There was an attempt by the Biden administration with the support by the way of some rhino Republicans. We'll get to that in one moment.
This is an attempt by the Joe Biden administration to make everyone that touches fingers with guns basically to register as a federal firearms licensee. Because as you know to be an FFL you have all sorts of rules that apply to you including running 4473 background checks on people that acquire guns from you. Anything that touches fingers with guns you have to basically put it down on a piece of paper. So was the Joe Biden administration's goal to create a gun registry anywhere they could including by basically making anyone including hobbyists become FFLs in order to transact in the business of guns or do anything when it comes to guns including selling off your personal collection or any of these sorts of things.
But, I'm happy to report that a federal district court judge has just taken this Biden era rule and destroyed it once and for all and permanently. Even though the Trump administration is in process of getting rid of it, the reality is it is now gone bye-bye thanks to a federal district judge entering pursuant to the administrative procedure act an order of vacatur vacatur which is the Latin word for basically to vacate which means a rule that was promulgated by the ATF which is illegal just got vacated in its entirety which means that no one in America has to comply with this Joe Biden era regulation by the ATF because it has been vacated as if it never existed.
This is a huge win for Gun Owners of America, the state of Texas, the Gun Owners Foundation, the Tennessee Firearms Association, and the Virginia Citizens Defense among other plaintiffs. And a big loss for not just the Joe Biden administration, but those Rhino Republican senators that are going bye-bye themselves. That would be Texas Senator John Cornyn, North Carolina Senator Thom Tillis, and Louisiana Senator Bill Cassidy. And as to those three senators, do not let the door hit the dupa your dupa on the way out. Goodbye. Thank God they're gone gone.
All right, folks. So, here is the summary of the lawsuit that was just completely 100% vindicated. We're going to give you a summary of the lawsuit they're going to break down what happened. And there's some icing on the cake here, folks, because many 15 hugely anti-gun states tried to intervene to defend this Joe Biden era rule, and Judge Kasprick Judge Kasprick literally just kicked them in the dupa and says, "Get out of here. I'm denying your request to participate in this case. It's moot anyway."
But, to begin with, here's the summary of the lawsuit brought by the Gun Owners of America. Check it out. This lawsuit is against the Biden administration's ATF rule known as the as the definition of engaged in the business as a dealer in firearms, which redefines what counts as a firearm dealer. This new definition not only ends a long-established understanding, but further infringes on the Americans' rights by criminalizing by criminalizing private transactions. Aside from making previously legal transfers illegal, this effectively creates a universal background check system without congressional approval, thereby further expanding and updating the ATF's already massive gun registry, and making it easier to enact and enforce a firearms confiscation program.
Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Foundation, state-based pro-gun groups, and several state attorney generals have now teamed up to take on the ATF to court in court over this rule change. And that lawsuit was filed in 2024, and I'm happy to report that the rule that they challenged, the Joe Biden era ATF rule brought about by Steve Dettelbach, for example, has gone bye-bye. Because Judge Kacsmaryk has just destroyed it by saying that this rule was illegal, unconstitutional, and violated all sorts of things six ways to Sunday, and the remedy of vacatur, which means to vacate, is now been entered, which means that rule has essentially been vacated as if it never ever ever existed. Fantastic news.
Here's what the judge had to say about this, and then wait till you see what the anti-gunners had to say. They're freaking out, and I'm glad they are. But let's see what Judge Kacsmaryk had to say in granting summary judgment in favor of the Gun Owners of America, the state of Texas, including Attorney General Ken Paxton, and several others. Right here, right now. Check it out.
"Before the court are plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, defendant's motion for summary judgment, and opposition to plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, and several putative intervener states motions or motion for leave to intervene on behalf of defendants. That would be on behalf of the government, by the way. After reviewing the motions and applicable law, the court denies the motion for a stay, grants in part the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, denies defendant's motion for summary judgment, and denies the state's motion to intervene as moot."
That's fantastic. So, basically, what he just said is he's granted the motion for summary judgment by the plaintiffs, which includes the state of Texas, the state of Utah, the state of Louisiana. It includes the Owners of America, the Tennessee Firearms Association, and the Virginia Citizens Defense League. And it's denying the motions for summary judgment, among other things, by the BATF. And it's rejecting the motion to intervene on behalf of brought by all these anti-gun states. We'll get to that in a moment. So, that is a big deal. Big relief in favor of the home team.
So, let's go on to see what Judge Kacsmaryk has to say next in his opinion. Basically, shutting down the ATF big time when it comes in the engaged-in-business rule. Check it out.
"In his June 11th, 2024, order granting plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction, this court described the extensive statutory, regulatory, and procedural background of this case. Since then, there have been several important developments. First, on July 2nd, 2024, the government defendants filed a notice of interlocutory appeal to the Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Six months later, on January 20, 2025, key date, folks, 2025. Guess who became president? That's right. President Biden left office, and President Trump began his second term. President Trump issued an executive order directing the Attorney General to review rules promulgated by defendant ATF during the Biden administration. And after that review, after that review, on April 16th, 2026, defendants asked the Fifth Circuit to dismiss their appeal. The Fifth Circuit granted that motion, and soon there afterwards the ATF published a notice of proposed rulemaking that would change or eliminate each aspect of the 2024 rule that this court found was likely unlawful. The government defendants then filed the instant motion for a stay arguing that it is not necessary for the court and the parties to resolve the lawfulness of the 2024 rule when the ATF is actively engaged in the rulemaking process to change that rule, and the government defendants are no longer appealing the court's prior order preliminarily enjoying the 2024 rule."
So, basically what happened here is that the Gun Owners of America filed a motion for summary judgment that says, "We win the case. This is clearly illegal what Joe Biden did. The ATF is acting unlawfully. Enjoin them. Vacate the order. Vacate the rule. Whatever you need to do, but shut it down." And then the Trump administration came back and said, "Look, we agree that this is illegal, and that's why we in the Trump administration are going to use our regulatory rulemaking authority to eliminate this rule. Get rid of the engaged in business rule, uh which we think is hooey." And therefore, we don't think you need to spend time, Judge, doing anything in this case cuz it's going to go away and become a moot point.
But Judge Kacsmaryk obviously decided, "You know what? The rule is still on the books legally right now. The rule has not yet been repealed by the Trump administration, and fairness to them, there's a process that must be played out. It takes time to repeal a rule. There's like at least 90 days that have to come and go. All sorts of craziness has to occur, and the reality is the judge says, "You know what? I'm not going to wait. I don't have to wait. I'm going to decide this issue right now, and I'm concluding that this engaged in business business rule promulgated by Joe Biden's ATF is illegal, and I'm going to vacate it right here and right now, and I'm not waiting for anything."
That's exactly what Judge Kacsmaryk did down there in the Northern District of Texas. Here's what he wrote.
"For the reasons stated in this court's June 11, 2024 order granting plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction, this court concludes that plaintiffs have succeeded yay have succeeded on the merits of their claims brought under the administrative procedure act against the challenged final rule the definition of engaged in the business as a dealer in firearms rule the final rule is therefore vacated vacated. Thus the court grants plaintiffs motion for summary judgment as to its request for vacatur. However, plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is denied as to injunctive relief because you don't need it cuz you've already won the whole case with vacatur."
And then the judge Kacsmaryk goes on to say because injunctive relief is redundant after vacatur and to avoid potential conflicts with the Supreme Court's decision in Trump versus Casa the court also now dissolves the preliminary injunction entered in its June 11th, 2024 order. And then the judge goes on to say that because APA vacatur is not party restricted the defendants listen carefully folks a big deal the defendants that would be the ATF and the government the defendants may not apply the final rule to anyone. Hear what I just said folks? To anyone. Including to individuals and organizations who are not parties to this case. And that's a big deal folks.
Now again, we don't want to get too nerdy here but the reality is when you're dealing with a rule promulgated by an administrative agency like the ATF if they promulgate a rule or regulation that is illegal like it exceeds their statutory authority under the enabling law that gives them the authority to do anything. Then the proper remedy is under the administrative procedure act to vacate the rule really null pro tunc which means as if it never existed. You don't need an injunction at that point because the rule no longer exists and because the rule in this case the engaged in business engaged in business rule as a dealer in firearms rule has gone bye-bye it's disappeared it's gone poof doesn't exist anymore. You don't need an injunction or injunctive relief to stop the enforcement of the rule because the rule no longer even exists. And that's why the court granted vacatur to eliminate the rule in its entirety and at the same time dissolve the injunction cuz there's no need for an injunction because you would only need an injunction if there was a rule on the books. But now the rule law is no longer on the books because it's been vacated, voided, bye-bye. And therefore that's why the judge granted the motion to vacate but denied the motion for an injunction cuz you no longer needed an injunction. And that's how that dynamic works for those of you interested.
But this is even more sweet. There's really icing on the cake here because there's a whole group of anti-gun states, including states like New Jersey, Connecticut, Hawaii, Maryland, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, Nevada, Minnesota, you get the usual suspects, tried to intervene and fight in favor of gun control, in favor of the Biden era engaged in business rule. And the court said, "Not only am I not going to consider your arguments, I'm not even going to let you intervene in this case because A would be moot and by the way you waited too long to move to intervene. So, sorry, I'm denying your motion to intervene to come in and defend the rule because it's simply too late."
Here's what he had to say in slapping these anti-gun states around saying, "No can do. You're not even coming into the case. You cannot defend this rule. Goodbye."
"The states' motion to intervene is denied for three reasons. First, because the putative intervenor states wish to defend only the final rule that the ATF is in the process of rescinding, their motion is likely moot. Second, the states will suffer no prejudice from being denied intervention when ATF is working to rescind the rule they wish to defend. And third, the court would alternatively deny the motion to intervene for untimeliness. Untimeliness. Here, the putative intervenor states filed their motion to intervene months, months after briefing had closed on the parties' motions for summary judgment, allowing intervention would mean significant delay, including the reopening of the dispositive motions briefing, all while defendants' motion for summary judgment filed during the Biden administration likely does adequately represent these states' position on the final rule."
Great stuff. And by the way, just in case you want to get a just a sense of what they're going to argue, they're going to basically saying that gun control is good, FFLs are are are bad, uh the gun industry is bad, all the usual stuff. Here is the summary of why these anti-gun states wanted to move to intervene and participate in this case, but Judge uh Kacsmaryk said no can do. Here's what the anti-gunners were arguing in their motion intervene in the case, which they were just denied the ability to do so. Check it out.
"This case challenges a final rule that implements Congress's amendments to the nation's firearm Safer Communities Act expanded the category of firearms dealers who must go through a background check process before they can sell firearms to a would-be customer and who must retain records retain records of those who sales that federal, state, and local law enforcement can then use to solve violent crimes and to go after straw purchases and gun traffickers. Because federal defendants can no longer be counted on to defend the rule, and because the elimination of the final rule would impose financial uh impose significant harms on uh we the movant states, these 15 movant states now move to intervene. And the basis for intervention is quite straightforward. The challengers seek final relief that would prevent implementation of the final rule across the country, whether in the form of vacatur or an injunction, but that relief would work enormous harms to the movant states' interest, that's the gun control states' interest, given that movant uh states have a right to intervene in light of this, and indeed as federal defendants have explained, absent the final rule, fewer firearm dealers would obtain a federal license and be subject to Congress's record-keeping requirements. Those records are critical to better enabling the ATF to provide local and state law enforcement with evidentiary leads to solve violent crime including to go after straw purchasers and illegal gun traffickers."
Well, that's a bunch of hooey. The reality is we know that the anti-gun states want to know where every gun owner is and where every gun is because they want to disarm us. They want to disarm us because they have very, very bad things planned for all of us and they don't want us to be citizens, they want us to be serfs, they want us to be like Europeans where we have no choice and the people go around beheading you in the parking lot or on the streets like they do in cities in Europe. Well, there's nothing you're going to be able to do about it and that is not American my friends and that is not going to happen here because we've got the guns and we're not giving them back, but there are certainly a lot of efforts on behalf of multi, multi-billionaires out there who are trying to take away the guns and they thought this engaged in business rule was the next step toward ultimate gun confiscation, but I'm happy to report thanks to the election of Donald Trump and the work of judges like Judge Kacsmaryk, uh that ain't happening anytime soon if ever.
All right, folks. There you have it. Make sure you follow me over there on X app for boxing out and don't forget to subscribe both the YouTube and the Rumble. I'll talk to you again real soon here. The Four Boxes done. Orders up. Table 2A.
>> [music]