On the same day that the Justice Department (DOJ) posted a video defending its stance on Second Amendment issues, it filed a legal brief in opposition to an en banc hearing in a Second Amendment case in the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit.
Thank you for reading this post, don't forget to follow and signup for notifications!
The case, United States v. Peterson, involves George Peterson, a Louisiana man, who was arrested for having an unserialized suppressor. Suppressors in the United States have to be serialized and registered with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) under the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA). This process requires submitting fingerprints, photographs, undergoing multiple background checks, and paying a $200 tax stamp fee.
Mr. Peterson was found guilty of NFA violations at the District Court level, but appealed the charges to the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. The case was heard in front of a three-judge panel. The three-judge panel rejected the defendant’s claim that the NFA restrictions on suppressors violated the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution. The three-judge panel concluded that suppressors are only firearm accessories and do not enjoy Second Amendment protections, which puts it at odds with the federal statute and the DOJ’s official stance.
After the loss, the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) stepped in to help out Mr. Peterson. The group assisted with filing a request for an en banc hearing. An en banc hearing is when the full Fifth Circuit bench would hear the case. If an en banc hearing is granted, the panel’s decision would be vacated.
Click the link to read the whole article: DOJ, NFA Only Burdens “Nonessential Firearm Accessories”
