ATF Moves To Roll Back Dealer, Brace And Bump Stock Rules
WASHINGTON, D.C. - The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives moved this week to roll back major firearms regulations on private gun sales, brace equipped pistols and bump stocks, saying parts of earlier rules exceeded statutory authority, failed in court or created enforcement confusion.
The package published in the Federal Register on May 6 puts three fights on the same track: who counts as a firearms dealer, when a braced pistol is treated as a short barreled rifle, and how federal regulations define a machine gun after the Supreme Court's 2024 decision in Garland v. Cargill.
The legal question is narrower than the political fight. ATF says the proposed dealer change would keep the definition Congress enacted in the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act while removing regulatory presumptions the agency added in 2024. The brace proposal would remove a 2023 factoring test that federal courts found defective. The bump stock rule is already final because ATF says it is conforming regulations to a binding Supreme Court ruling.
The Story So Far
The Justice Department said the rules are part of a larger regulatory review ordered under Executive Order 14206, which directed the Attorney General to examine regulations, guidance, litigation positions and classifications that affect Second Amendment rights. The Federal Register text of that order says the Attorney General was told to review DOJ and ATF rules issued from January 2021 through January 2025.
DOJ said this week that ATF is releasing 34 final and proposed rulemaking notices after that review. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche framed the package as a rights issue, saying, "The Second Amendment is not a second-class right." ATF Director Robert Cekada said the reforms reflect a commitment to regulations that are "clear, legally sound, and narrowly tailored."
Gun control advocates see the same package differently. Everytown for Gun Safety said after the Supreme Court's Cargill ruling that bump stocks should be banned by Congress because they allow semiautomatic rifles to mimic automatic fire. Gun rights groups have pressed the administration from the other direction, arguing that the brace rule and related enforcement positions continued to expose lawful owners to criminal risk after court defeats.
What's Happening Now
The dealer proposal, listed as RIN 1140-AB01, would revise the 2024 regulation implementing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act definition of being engaged in the business as a firearms dealer. ATF says Congress defined the term, and the agency added examples and rebuttable presumptions that it now proposes to remove.
The Federal Register summary says ATF determined those 2024 changes have not shown the expected impact on federal firearms license applications, licensing actions, civil forfeitures or other enforcement metrics. In the proposed rule, ATF says, "On further review, ATF agrees that the EIB rule is replete with procedural and substantive problems."
ATF is also trying to draw a line between repealing the regulation and repealing the law. In its Q&A, the agency says, "ATF's enforcement authority against unlicensed dealing comes from the law, the Gun Control Act as amended by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, not from the 2024 rule." The same Q&A says it remains unlawful to deal firearms without a federal firearms license when a person intends a pattern of repeated buying and selling motivated predominantly by profit.
The brace proposal, listed as RIN 1140-AA98, would remove two paragraphs added to the regulatory definitions of "rifle" in 2023. According to the Federal Register notice, courts found the 2023 final rule violated the Administrative Procedure Act, and several courts enjoined, stayed or vacated it.
ATF says the proposal does not declare every brace equipped firearm outside the National Firearms Act. The agency's Q&A says whether a particular firearm is regulated as a short barreled rifle depends on the statutory definition enacted by Congress and codified at 26 U.S.C. 5845.
The bump stock action is different because it is a final rule effective May 6. ATF says it is removing two sentences from three regulatory definitions of machine gun because the Supreme Court held that the agency exceeded its statutory authority when it classified non mechanical bump stock devices as machine guns.
Animation by Phoenix7777, via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY-SA 4.0)
The Conservative View
Supporters of the rollback argue that ATF is retreating from rules that stretched statutory text beyond what Congress enacted. That argument is strongest on bump stocks, where the Supreme Court already ruled against the agency's interpretation.
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the Court in Cargill that "a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a machinegun because it cannot fire more than one shot by a single function of the trigger." The ATF final rule now adopts that holding by removing regulatory language that had folded bump stocks into the machine gun definition.
Gun Owners of America has made a similar statutory argument on stabilizing braces. In a March statement on its lawsuit, the group said a federal court had vacated the brace rule and argued that DOJ was still enforcing the legal theory that some brace equipped pistols are short barreled rifles.
The Progressive View
Gun violence prevention groups argue the rollback will weaken safeguards that were designed to keep high risk firearms and accessories under tighter federal oversight. Their sharpest public reaction has centered on bump stocks because of the 2017 Las Vegas massacre, where officials said the gunman used rifles equipped with bump stocks.
Everytown President John Feinblatt said after Cargill, "Guns outfitted with bump stocks fire like machine guns, they kill like machine guns, and they should be banned like machine guns." Everytown also said as many as 35 states could be affected where state laws do not separately restrict bump stocks.
On the dealer rule, gun control advocates have long argued that repeated sellers should not be able to avoid licensing and background check obligations by describing themselves as hobbyists. ATF's current Q&A says the underlying criminal prohibition remains, but critics of repeal are likely to argue during the comment period that removing presumptions makes enforcement harder.
Other Perspectives
The libertarian legal argument is not only about firearms. It is about agency power. Under that view, Congress writes criminal statutes, agencies interpret them, and courts decide whether the interpretation crosses the line from administration into lawmaking.
That is the mechanism behind this package. Congress wrote the Gun Control Act, the National Firearms Act and the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. ATF added interpretive rules. Courts then tested those rules under statutory text and the Administrative Procedure Act. A later administration is now deciding whether to defend, narrow or rescind the regulatory layer.
Independent observers are likely to watch the notice and comment record. ATF says comments on both the dealer and brace proposals are due August 4, 2026. The agency says final rules must respond to significant issues raised in comments before the Code of Federal Regulations is updated.
Economic Implications
The immediate financial effects fall most directly on federal firearms licensees, gun sellers, accessory makers and owners of brace equipped firearms. ATF says the dealer rollback has not produced the expected increase in license applications, administrative licensing actions, civil forfeitures or related metrics, which is part of the agency's case for removing the 2024 regulatory structure.
The brace proposal gives a wider view of industry scale. In the Federal Register notice, ATF cites an estimate of 7 million firearms with attached stabilizing braces manufactured over eight years, or about 875,000 annually for purposes of the agency's analysis. If the rule is finalized, manufacturers and owners would still face the statutory short barreled rifle test, but not the specific 2023 factor test.
For bump stocks, ATF says the final rule has no new costs and estimates a minimum annualized benefit of $20,487,720. The agency bases that figure on estimated future bump stock production of 62,084 units and an average 2025 price of $330.
Photo by Tony Webster, via Wikimedia Commons (CC BY 2.0)
By the Numbers
The Justice Department says ATF is releasing 34 final and proposed rulemaking notices after the Executive Order 14206 review.
ATF says comments on the dealer rule and stabilizing brace rule are due August 4, 2026.
ATF says the bump stock final rule took effect May 6, 2026.
ATF cites an estimate of 7 million firearms with attached stabilizing braces manufactured over eight years.
ATF estimates at least $20,487,720 in annualized benefit from the bump stock final rule.
What People Are Saying
"The Second Amendment is not a second-class right." - Todd Blanche, Acting Attorney General, in a Justice Department statement
"ATF's enforcement authority against unlicensed dealing comes from the law, the Gun Control Act as amended by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, not from the 2024 rule." - Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, in its New Era of Reform Q&A
"We hold that a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a machinegun because it cannot fire more than one shot by a single function of the trigger." - Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the Supreme Court majority in Garland v. Cargill
"When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck." - Justice Sonia Sotomayor, dissenting in Garland v. Cargill
"Guns outfitted with bump stocks fire like machine guns, they kill like machine guns, and they should be banned like machine guns." - John Feinblatt, president of Everytown for Gun Safety, after the Cargill decision
The Big Picture
The next fight is administrative before it is legislative. ATF must take comments on the dealer and brace proposals, respond to significant objections, and decide whether to finalize the rescissions. Lawsuits could follow if opponents argue the agency failed to explain the reversal or supporters argue the final rules leave too much of the old framework intact.
Congress also remains the only body that can change the statutory definitions at the center of the dispute. The Supreme Court's bump stock decision turned on the text of the National Firearms Act, while the dealer proposal turns on the Gun Control Act as amended by the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. If lawmakers want a different rule, they will have to write it into statute.
