PA Bill Number: HR541
Title: Recognizing the month of October 2024 as "Domestic Violence Awareness Month" in Pennsylvania.
Description: A Resolution recognizing the month of October 2024 as "Domestic Violence Awareness Month" in Pennsylvania.
Last Action:
Last Action Date: Sep 27, 2024
ATF claims Administrative Procedures Act exemption for proposed ammo ban notice :: 02/19/2015
A spokesperson for the Bureau of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives told Gun Rights Examiner Wednesday afternoon that ATF’s recent ammunition ban proposal is not required to be published in the Federal Register. That claim was in answer to a query after determining ATF’s notice does not appear in the government’s official journal, and further noting a Wednesday Reuters report that a tangentially-related lack of rulemaking publication was given by a Texas judge as his reason for blocking the Obama administration’s “immigration overhaul.”
“U.S. District Judge Andrew Hanen ... faulted Obama for not giving public notice of his plans,” the report explains. “The failure to do so, Hanen wrote, was a violation of the 1946 Administrative Procedure Act, which requires notice in a publication called the Federal Register as well as an opportunity for people to submit views in writing.”
While the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has invited public comment in its “framework for determining whether certain projectiles are “primarily intended for sporting purposes” within the meaning of 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(17)(C),” correspondents with this column question if that meets the requirements of the APA, which states “General notice of proposed rulemaking shall be published in the Federal Register...”
No such notice has been posted at this writing by ATF. A search of Regulations.gov (“Your voice in Federal decision-making”) also turns up nothing.
Per Denise Brown of ATF Enforcement Programs and Services in this afternoon’s telephone conversation, this will “not actually be a [regulatory] change, more of a policy along those lines.” Brown said the framework document is a notice only, and will therefore not be published in the Federal Register, characterizing the document’s intent as “information gathering” in order to collect technical information, which could affect the Bureau’s final determination.
Brown confirmed ATF’s decision not to publish in the Federal Register is based on the exemption provision in the APA. That states “Except when notice or hearing is required by statute, this subsection does not apply ... to interpretative rules, general statements of policy, or rules of agency organization, procedure, or practice.” Also exempted is “when the agency for good cause finds (and incorporates the finding and a brief statement of reasons therefore in the rules issued) that notice and public procedure thereon are impracticable, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest.”
That the proposed “interpretation” affects a considerable segment of the ammunition market and falls well within considerations of public interest is indisputable. Also in the public interest is the ability of affected parties to read comments submitted to date, so that arguments necessary for knowledgeably commenting on the issue are available for those wishing to add constructive inputs of their own. Additionally, but of unknown significance, is the documented reality that justification for the proposed rule cannot be based on a currently-low violent crime rate, nor on any cited evidence supporting the contention that the ammunition affected poses a special danger to law enforcement.
The absence of such a notice could be viewed as minimizing public cognizance and feedback, but whether that rises to the level of an actionable Administrative Procedures Act violation is a question for specialist attorneys to answer. It should also be a matter of interest for Congressional overseers to look into, to ensure the administration follows the “spirit and intent” of all laws, including “the Supreme Law of the Land,” as unelected bureaucrats craft rules depriving the representatives’ constituents of ammunition arguably protected under the Second Amendment, and therefore requiring a level of judicial scrutiny beyond speculative Justice Department fears.
For now, Brown acknowledges ATF “could go both ways” after the comment period ATF is offering on its notice expires on March 16. Either a final determination could be issued at that time, or the matter could receive further, as yet undetermined, consideration.
Suggested Links
