And real quick, I want to thank the sponsor of CMMG for always supporting this channel. They love free speech, especially around the Second Amendment, and if you believe in quality precision and protecting our rights, these are folks worth knowing. Whether you’re looking for 22s or bigger chamberings, or just accessories done right with attention to detail, CMMG always delivers. Their craftsmanship and respect for the Second Amendment show, and as always, purchasing from reliable manufacturers helps us ensure safety, accountability, and quality. G&G 10 will make you smile as well. Thanks to CMMG for sponsoring this kind of important conversation.

Now let’s jump in. To understand today’s ruling, we need to back up just a bit. Under the Gun Control Act of 1968, only those engaged in the business of dealing in firearms are required to obtain a federal firearms license and run background checks on sales. Private individuals who sell guns occasionally, say part of a collection or a hobby, have historically been exempt. But in 2024, in April to be exact, the ATF published a final rule redefining when a private seller becomes and engaged in the business dealer, effectively expanding the number of private sales that require background checks.

Under the new rule, even a single sale or an offer to sell a gun might count in certain circumstances, a major shift from past practice. ATF doesn’t make the law either. Now critics argued that the rule was vague and overreaching and legally unsupported. Then enter the lawsuits. Among them was Butler versus Garland, later Butler v Bondi, brought by private individuals and including the NRA. The plaintiffs argued that ATF exceeded its authority because Congress intended that only repeated regular transactions should count for the business definition. This new expansion of regulatory reach had many in the gun rights community on edge.

On October 1, 2025, US District Judge Cory L. Mays issued a decision that permanently blocks key portions of the ATF’s engaged in the business rule, at least as to the plaintiffs and all NRA members. Now let me break that down. Judge Mays found the following and why it matters as well. Number one, single sale prohibitions exceeded statutory authority. Judge Mays agreed with the plaintiffs that ATF’s interpretation was overreaching. The judge noted that Congress didn’t intend for a single sale or an offer, just a single offer. You don’t have to make the sale just to offer to sell a firearm.

They didn’t intend that to trigger the business requirement. The rule’s expansion to that level is inconsistent with the law. The judge emphasized that regular dealing requires repetition, more than just one firearm in an isolated transaction. Number two was the invalid expansion beyond congressional mandate. In his view, the ATF exceeded the authority granted under the Gun Control Act by sweeping in many previously exempt private sales. That overreach makes parts of the rule invalid here. Number three was broad relief for NRA members. The injunction applies not only to the named plaintiffs, Don Butler and David Glidewell, but also to NRA members, shielding them from enforcement of those challenged proportions.

Now what this means in practice for now, ATF cannot enforce those parts of the rule that criminalize isolated or single sales or deem those as engaging in a firearms business or engaged in the business of dealing firearms against NRA members, the two plaintiffs, until further resolution. In a related development, a judge in Alabama also moved to block parts of the ATF rule, siding with gun collectors and NRA interests as well. Key takeaways from the Alabama ruling. The court determined that parts of the engaged in the business rule exceeded agency authority, especially as applied to people who trade or sell firearms occasionally, such as collectors.

This ruling is especially meaningful in states with strong gun culture and many collectors reinforcing legal pressure on ATF s regulatory approach. Now the dual rulings here, May s in the federal court and the ruling in the Alabama court, help strengthen the argument that ATF s rule may not survive judicial scrutiny nationwide. These cases combine to create legal headwinds against ATF s broader enforcement efforts. It s helpful to compare this to the pistol brace fight, which offers somewhat similar themes of agency overreach and judicial pushback. In April of 2024, Federal Judge Sam Lincey enjoined enforcement of the ATF s pistol brace rule as the NRA members, preventing ATF from applying the new rule to them pending full litigation.

There were a couple of judges that had many levels of enjoining rulings here where basically every 2A group was covered, and Judge Lincey noted that ATF s redefinition of pistols with pistol-stabilizing braces as short-barreled rifles was a reversal of longstanding policy and involved highly subjective tests. Importantly, the Fifth Circuit had already found the brace rule violated the Administrative Procedure Act and failed the logical outgrowth test. These prior rulings create a legal precedent and momentum, reinforcing arguments used now against the engaged in the business rule. So, what does this all mean for you, or I, or whether you re a collector, or a part-time seller, or everyday gun owner? Well, current protections for now.

If you are an NRA member affected by the rule, this decision blocks enforcement of key parts of ATF s regulatory scheme against you. Occasional single firearm sales are less likely to be treated as business transactions in so far as those blocked parts are concerned. Collectors may have additional cover under the Alabama Judge s ruling as well. Some caveats or limitations are the injunction is not nationwide. It s limited in scope to NRA members and the plaintiffs here that are named in the lawsuit. Other portions of the ATF rule may remain enforceable or could be applied to non-NRA individuals.

I know many people like why do they even do that. That s kind of how court cases work. To have a nationwide one, it s generally the Supreme Court that does that. This is not the final outcome, so that needs to be understood. Further appeals are likely because Pam Bondi for some reason doesn t just drop these cases or make a single entry saying that we re not going to continue this lawsuit because this is an unconstitutional action by an unconstitutional group. But here we are. ATF or the US government could revise, appeal or attempt new rulemaking.

Now, what should you know for now? Number one, you need to stay informed. Monitor legal developments, especially appeals and higher court rulings. I will do that for you. All you gotta do is subscribe to Guns N Gadgets to stay in the know. If you re going to make sales, my recommendation, you don t have to do this. This is just me. You know, I m not an attorney. I didn t even stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night. But I would document any activity. If you do sell guns and you re covered, if you re an NRA member like many people are, if you do sell some guns, just keep clear records just to cover your own backside.

Even if you re not required to legally, you never know. Now, consult. Legal counsel is something you should do. I recommend that if you re in a state or a district where ATF attempts enforcement, like behind the blue wall, you may want to just talk to an attorney. Also, support all the good cases out there like NRA, SAF, FPC, GOA, there are other organizations as well that often coordinate legal challenges. Backing them helps, guys and gals. I know everybody always says, I m not giving another nickel to these people until we get every, until everything s repealed.

It s just not how it works. Let s be realistic in our goals and expectations. And next, stay engaged politically. Like pressure your representatives, your employees. If your employees suck, then replace them. And you need to tell them regularly. If you own a business or you work at a business, regular intervals with your boss or regular evaluations of your employees is good business. So you should be doing the same with your representatives. Go visit them and give them your evaluation. And we should also examine the other side s arguments and risks to stay in the know.

That s how we learn what they re doing. The ATF and proponents might argue that expanded regulation is needed to close loopholes and that s a good way for us to use their own stuff against them, guys and gals. In the appeals, the ATF could argue that the judge s interpretation is too narrow or that Congress s language permits broader agency discretion. But either way, Congress makes definitions. So that s something always to push back on if your legislator says that to you. So just keep that in mind. As always, with constitutional and regulatory battles, the legal landscape remains fluid.

So I ll recap real quick. The ATF s engaged in a business rule that sought to broaden what counts as a firearm dealer, potentially sweeping in many private sellers, like probably millions of people. What they wanted was everybody to go through an FFL, thus causing you to have a 4473 that they could scan and create their digital searchable database that GOA uncovered. They just wanted everything on their database. The judge here, Judge Mays s ruling, blocks enforcement of key parts of the rule against NRA members, finding the expansion was inconsistent with statute.

And don t forget the Alabama court also blocked parts of the rule favoring collectors as well. And there s been similar pushback. This is very similar to the pistol brace rule and how it was structured. So I think the fight s going to go the same way. I think ultimately we re going to win here. But none of this is settled. We still need to watch the appeals, the enforcement actions, and potential new regulations. And if you found this helpful, please like and share it so that more people understand exactly what s going on.

Subscribe to this channel so more people get clarity in this complicated field of 2A litigation and legislation. Drop your questions down below. I try to read as many comments as I can. But I want you to stay alert. I want you to stay free. I want you to stay armed. And I want you to continue to love the United States of America. I will see you on the next time here on Guns and Gadgets. [tr:trw].

See more of Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News on their Public Channel and the MPN Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News channel.