This Is Why Gun Rights Advocates Aren't Happy With Pam Bondi
Claiming Attorney General Pam Bondi is a strong defender of the Second Amendment is like saying former President Joe Biden’s mental capacity is in tip-top shape. Sure, it sounds nice, but anyone paying attention can see that it’s just a heaping pile of bovine excrement.
Despite what some are saying, Bondi’s Department of Justice has been hard at work on gun control laws. I’m not talking about striking them down, I’m talking about defending them. Vigorously.
President Donald Trump, while he was on the campaign trail, constantly declared that his administration would protect gun rights. After the bump stock ban and other gun restrictions that were imposed under his first term, he knew he had to make nice with those of us who are strong proponents of gun rights.
Unfortunately, his second term hasn’t been as supportive of the Second Amendment as many of us would like.
Let’s start with one that is hot off the presses. On Tuesday, Bondi’s DOJ filed a motion urging the appeals court to deny a rehearing on a challenge to the National Firearms Act’s rules on suppressors. Current law requires those who own these devices to register them with the government and pay extra taxes for them.
The DOJ seeks to preserve a panel’s ruling that this rule is constitutional. “The panel correctly held that the NFA’s modest restrictions on suppressor possession do not violate the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms,” the document reads.
The filing reiterates that “the NFA does not outright prohibit suppressor possession but rather merely conditions possession on proper criteria.”
The brief narrows the constitutional stakes by distinguishing suppressors from ordinary firearms and by citing forthcoming tax changes that blunt the challenger’s claims. It asserts the rule addresses accessories “uniquely adaptable to criminal misuse” and leaves compliant ownership undisturbed: “The NFA regulation at issue does not target ordinary firearms such as handguns but only nonessential firearm accessories,” and “Law-abiding citizens remain free to possess suppressors so long as they register them.”
Next, we have the federal ban on marijuana users owning firearms. Under Bondi, DOJ attorneys are fighting tooth and nail to fend off legal challenges to the ban. Under this rule, anyone who uses marijuana or other “illegal” drugs is barred from exercising their right to keep and bear arms.
Those violating the rule could face up to 15 years in prison. That’s right, folks. If you like to light up a joint to relax, you could lose over a decade of freedom if you also want to be able to defend yourself from violent criminals.
As ridiculous as this rule is, Bondi’s Justice Department is aggressively defending it. In recent court filings, the agency insisted that marijuana users — medical or recreational — should be deemed “presumptively ineligible” for gun ownership, citing supposed dangers and a “lack of respect for the law.”
Even further, the DOJ has appealed every case it has lost on this matter, showing just how adamant they are about throwing people in cages for consuming a product of which they do not approve.
Next, we have the ATF rule that redefined who is considered a gun dealer. Before the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, those who sold firearms had to make most of their income from gun sales to be considered a gun dealer who required a license to ply their trade.
Yet, after that ridiculous piece of legislation was passed in 2022 under the Biden administration (thanks, Sen. John Cornyn), the definition has been expanded in a way that almost anyone could be considered a gun dealer. In fact, I covered the story of a gun collector named Greg Berry, who is currently serving a four-year sentence in federal prison because he sold and traded firearms at gun shows. Despite the fact that he didn’t make much money from his sales and trades, the ATF still acted as if he were a dire threat to public safety.
You can learn more about Greg Berry’s story here:
title=”YouTube video player” frameborder=”0” allow=”accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share” referrerpolicy=”strict-origin-when-cross-origin” allowfullscreen></iframe>
There are likely plenty of people like Berry whose lives the government has ruined under a silly law that empowers the government to target people simply for trading firearms. In essence, the regulation has created a de facto gun registry, allowing the state to keep track of those who might occasionally sell an old rifle they don’t want. Yet, Bondi’s DOJ is continuing to defend the regulation.
Federal courts have struck down significant portions of the rule in the case of Butler v. Bondi, ruling that the ATF had overstepped its authority. Nevertheless, the DOJ is still fighting to keep the rest of it in effect. The agency argues that the rule “clarifies” the law instead of expanding it — which is an utter lie.
What about the legal battle over short-barreled rifles (SBRs)? Earlier this year, the Supreme Court reviewed Rush v. United States, which involved a challenge against the National Firearms Act’s requirement that SBRs be registered with the government. Bondi’s DOJ opposed a Supreme Court review of the case. It filed a brief arguing that the government mandates regarding registration, taxation, and penalties for those who don’t register their SBRs fit within the longstanding tradition of firearm regulations.
The agency contended that the court of appeals had “correctly rejected” the challenge to the rule and that a Supreme Court review was “not warranted.”
This isn’t to say that the DOJ under Trump has not pushed for pro-gun policies. It has supported challenges to assault weapons bans in states like Illinois and New Jersey. The agency has rolled back some of the onerous ATF restrictions enacted under the previous administration and is considering restoring gun rights for nonviolent felons.
But it is clear that gun rights advocates still have much work to do when it comes to holding the administration accountable. Trump promised to protect gun rights. We need to make sure he does.