In a spectacular development for MSLF’s Center to Keep and Bear Arms case, VanDerStok v. Garland, Judge Reed O’Connor of the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas handed a victory to nearly all of Mountain States’ clients in the ongoing case!
In early September, the court—finding it likely that the court would deem the ATF’s Final Rule radically redefining firearms unlawful—imposed a preliminary injunction against the ATF enforcing the Final Rule against our client, Tactical Machining. Tactical Machining is a producer and retailer that sells “80% Lowers” among other items that enable peaceable Americans to manufacture their own firearms. The court’s decision was a major relief for Darren Peters, who founded his small business to help others help themselves.
However, Tactical Machining’s customers were still skeptical. After all, what good is it for a producer or retailer to be protected from an unlawful regulation if those who purchase its products are not protected as well? The ATF may not be allowed to go after the businesses, but what about the customers?
As Judge O’Connor put it, “Tactical Machining’s injuries cannot be remedied if its only source of revenue—customer willingness to transact business—has been severely curtailed…customers must be covered by the preliminary injunction.” Tactical Machining customers are now protected! But this isn’t the only victory of the day.
Additionally, two individual clients of Mountain States—Jennifer VanDerStok and Mike Andren—were included in the newly expanded injunction. We argued that the ATF’s Final Rule was so vague that anyone who purchased certain parts could be subject to criminal penalties and be irreparably harmed. Such a threat from the federal government is nothing short of chilling to Americans who want to practice their constitutionally protected natural right of self-defense.
Judge O’Connor agreed.
But as this Court previously noted, where a plaintiff “faces substantial threat of irreparable harm…it is no answer to say that it may avoid the harm by complying with an unlawful agency rule” … the plaintiff’s purported choice to comply—or else—with a challenged government dictate, as evidence by the plaintiff’s decision to desist from engaging in the regulated activity, is adequate to establish irreparable harm.
We wholeheartedly agree, Your Honor! Mountain States and its Center to Keep and Bear Arms are proud to have secured this victory for Tactical Machining and its customers, Jennifer, and Mike.
But we aren’t finished yet. Millions of Americans are still subject to the ATF’s unlawful Final Rule. We will not let up until we have secured protections for every peaceable American who seeks to defend themselves and their loved ones. The fight continues, and we’ll be there every step of the way.
