SCOTUS and EPA

**ryr8828** · 06-30-22, 13:16

Since scotus ruled that the epa over stepped their boundaries by making policy, would that apply to the ATF as well?

I realize it isn't that easy, but people all over the internet are now claiming the pistol brace fiasco is now solved because the atf is neutered because of this one ruling.

**BoringGuy45** · 06-30-22, 13:20

Originally Posted by ryr8828

Since scotus ruled that the epa over stepped their boundaries by making policy, would that apply to the ATF as well?

I realize it isn't that easy, but people all over the internet are now claiming the pistol brace fiasco is now solved because the atf is neutered because of this one ruling.

I had the same question on another thread. The wording of the ruling certainly suggests that this may end up being the case. However, it'll take a little time for all this to unfold before we know for sure. However, it DOES seem to be connected and it follows the same logic.

**ryr8828** · 06-30-22, 13:30

Originally Posted by BoringGuy45

I had the same question on another thread. The wording of the ruling certainly suggests that this may end up being the case. However, it'll take a little time for all this to unfold before we know for sure. However, it DOES seem to be connected and it follows the same logic.

Would you please tell me what that thread is? I did a search for a post like mine before I made this thread and I'd like to view it also.

**Alex V** · 06-30-22, 14:36

I believe this is the case. It would seem the opinion is stating that executive branch agencies can't make laws via administrative rules.

I think it will take several lawsuits against the ATF, using the EPA case opinion to strike down their new nutty rules like braces (December) and 80% stuff (August)

**SteyrAUG** · 06-30-22, 14:47

Unlike the EPA, the ATF has the "spoter clause" which allows them to make policy, write determination letters declare what firearms are suitable for importation or domestic manufacture and such based upon nothing more than if they "feel" it is suitable for sporting applications.

**Diamondback** · 06-30-22, 14:59

Originally Posted by SteyrAUG

Unlike the EPA, the ATF has the "spoter clause" which allows them to make policy, write determination letters declare what firearms are suitable for importation or domestic manufacture and such based upon nothing more than if they "feel" it is suitable for sporting applications.

So how do we get a suit to spike Sporter Clause? FPC and SAF are itching for the next big fight...

**BangBang77** · 06-30-22, 15:08

Originally Posted by Diamondback

So how do we get a suit to spike Sporter Clause? FPC and SAF are itching for the next big fight...

Wait until they throw out the brace rules and whatever nonsense they are slated to dump in December.

File suit based on the recent decision and include language that the sporter clause is being used as justification for violating the recent decision.

Then again, I'm an engineer. A mechanical one at that, so not even considered smart compared to my electrical and chemical brethren...😎

**Diamondback** · 06-30-22, 15:18

Originally Posted by BangBang77

Wait until they throw out the brace rules and whatever nonsense they are slated to dump in December.

File suit based on the recent decision and include language that the sporter clause is being used as justification for violating the recent decision.

Then again, I'm an engineer. A mechanical one at that, so not even considered smart compared to my electrical and chemical brethren...��

Still head and shoulders above Civil though...

We had a joke when I was an Engineering student in high school...

Three engineers are having lunch together, an Architect, a Mech Engineer and a Civil Engineer. For some reason, they get into a debate about what kind of engineer God was when he designed the human body. The architect deep-dives the skeleton for a good five minutes about its light weight, high strength for weight, how it repairs itself... "Surely the Lord was an architect!"

Then the Mech Engineer has his say, comparing the muscles and ligaments and tendons to hydraulics, pulleys, cables etc. for another five minutes. "Surely God was a Mechanical Engineer!"

The civil engineer is quiet for the first time in a long time, the other two look at each other... and then the waitress chimes in, "He must have been a Civil Engineer, because nobody else would route a toxic-waste pipeline through a recreational area!"