Untangling Lawsuits

There are 2A lawsuits everywhere and it gets confusing as to where they stand and what the latest legal action means.  In addition, headlines are getting more and more deceptive and ‘journalists’ often don’t explain the situation well. (Perhaps because they don’t really understand it.)

Here are some helpful hints from a non-lawyer in non-legal-speak.  Of course, this is simplified and lawyers make their money arguing over the complexities.

A lawsuit can be filed against a government body to stop them from doing something.  Two examples: NY State was sued to stop the Concealed Carry Improvement Act (CCIA) from going into effect and the Trump administration was sued to stop them from deporting illegal aliens. 

It’s important to know that lawsuits challenge specific parts of a law or regulation and do not necessarily challenge all of the law or regulation.

These lawsuits can take years to settle, so the suers (plaintiffs) often ask for a ‘preliminary injunction.’  If granted, a ‘preliminary injunction’ will stop the government from enforcing their law / regulation while the lawsuit is actually being settled. (For instance, stop Hochul from enforcing the CCIA or stop Trump from deporting illegal aliens while the case is being settled.) 

Think of the request for a preliminary injunction as a separate lawsuit (even though technically they are not.)  Lawsuit one wants the government to be permanently stopped while lawsuit two wants the government stopped while lawsuit one is being decided. 

Lawsuit two - the preliminary injunction request - usually gets decided before lawsuit one, which makes things further confusing.

Lawsuit two - the preliminary injunction - can end up working its way through the court system and sometimes goes all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States. (SCOTUS)   

A judge is only supposed to issue a preliminary injunction if the judge believes (1) that there will be irreparable harm done if the order is not granted and 2) that the person seeking the order has a high probability of success on the merits and (3) the person seeking the order must have standing to raise the issue   The judge is supposed to use judgement but many (especially in NY State) seem to let their politics guide them.

Now, a few words about the court systems are necessary.

There are two separate court systems: NY State and the Federal government.  But they both consist of three levels. 

The lowest level is the trial level where the case is initially argued and the facts are established. 

The next level is an appeals level where the trial level loser can ask for a review of the case.  This level must accept all appeals made to it.

The highest level is also an appeals level.  (SCOTUS on the federal level.)  It has three paths it can follow:

(1) This level does not have to accept appeals.  If it does not accept an appeal, the judgement of the first appeals level stands and that is the end of the case. 

(2) This level can also refer the case back to the first appeals level with instructions; it does this because it wants all the issues entered into the records before it hears the case. 

(3) It can also agree to hear the case – usually months into the future.

TV talking heads and newspaper editorial writers (and anyone with an opinion on line) will often try to interpret what it means when SCOTUS refers a case back to the lower appeals level.  First, that is the commenter’s opinion and not fact.  Second, many are influenced by their politics and want to create a certain impression and often leave out – or bury – important facts.  Be wary of these interpretations.

Let’s look at a current 2A case as an example.  As of today, this is our understanding.  If you are paying attention to current 2A lawsuits, you may have heard about the Antonyuk v James case.  (James is Steven James who is the Superintendent of the NY State Police).

Antonyuk filed a lawsuit against the CCIA (lawsuit 1) and requested a preliminary injunction (lawsuit 2) so that the CCIA could not be enforced while lawsuit 1 is being heard.  All the following has to do with the preliminary injunction case (lawsuit 2).

The trial judge mostly found for Antonyuk and issued a preliminary injunction.

The appeals level court reversed most of the trial judge’s findings and found mostly that much of the CCIA could be enforced. 

Antonyuk appealed to SCOTUS

SCOTUS referred the case back to the appeals court with instructions to reconsider the case in the light of another SCOTUS decision.      

The appeals court decided that the other case did not impact Antonyuk and let their original decision stand.

Antonyuk went back to SCOTUS.

SCOTUS refused to hear the case so the appeals court decision as to the preliminary injunction stands.

What that means is that there now is an appeals level preliminary injunction stopping enforcement of a few parts of CCIA but most of the CCIA can be enforced by NY State.

However, lawsuit 1 to permanently stop CCIA will now be heard at the trial court level and it will work its way up through the system.  (Now you know why these cases cost thousands of dollars.)

The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals (the appeals court below SCOTUS) covers all of NY State.  Decisions of this court apply to all of NY State but not to other circuits.  For example, the 1st Circuit could ignore the Antonyuk ruling and Antonyuk would not be enforceable anywhere but in the 2nd Circuit.  (A moot point since Antonyuk only applies to a NY State law.) 

And if you understand all that, an important monkey-wrench has now arisen.

According to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(c), when someone asks for a temporary restraining order* or a preliminary injunction, they are supposed to put down a ‘security payment’ to cover the government’s costs if the restraining order is overturned.  This has been largely ignored.

An example: the ACLU asked a judge to issue an order demanding the return of planes deporting suspected Venezuelan gang members.  If this procedure had been enforced, the ACLU would likely have had to fork over enough money to cover the return of those planes and the detention of the suspects in U.S. facilities in the interim. That money would remain as bond, and the judge would return it to the ACLU if the ACLU ultimately succeeds in the lawsuit.  If the ACLU fails, it loses the money.

This could have a chilling effect on temporary restraining orders and preliminary injunctions as the suer (plaintiff) would want to be very sure they have a winning case.  (And it’s never a sure thing.)  Losing the case could cost hundreds-of-thousands or millions. 

If used, this procedure would primarily impact the much-discussed cases where trial level judges are issuing nationwide restraining orders against the Trump administration.  Currently, anti-Trump administration plaintiffs will ‘judge shop’ for likely sympathetic judges at the initial trial level and there are no consequences to the plaintiff or the judge if the judges rule based on their political beliefs rather than the law.  But if the plaintiff’s had to fund these ‘security payments,’ that would might stop many of these in-their-tracks.

But for 2A lawsuits, that would put an additional financial burden on these cases which are usually funded on a shoestring.  The government defending the law has bottomless taxpayer dollars to keep appealing and running up the tab.

*Temporary Restraining Orders usually last for only 14 days, maximum. 

Another Gun Control Failure  by Bohdan Rabarsky

   Last Thursdaya, at Florida State University, shots rang out from a lone gunman and before the gunman was neutralized by police 2 innocent people were killed and 6 injured. Didn’t the gunman realize it was a Gun Free Zone?  Possibly, there weren’t enough signs posted about the campus?  Or was it he just decided not to follow the rules, as criminals always do?

   Was this some lone wolf out to wreak havoc with a weapon of war – what gun control advocates also call assault rifles – and what we call modern sporting rifles?  No.  This 20 year old University student used his mother’s handgun in this carnage.

  Florida is a pro-gun state, but still has a few restrictive and ineffective gun control measures. For instance, after the 2018 Parkland High School shooting, the Florida legislature enacted a law that to purchase a long gun you must be 21. It was also a Federal Law that you must be 21 to purchase a handgun.

The FSU shooter was a 20 year old!  So, those laws did not stop him.

   After the Parkland High School shooting, Florida also passed a Red Flag Law which allows police to disarm dangerous people before they can hurt themselves or anyone else. There were some indications that the 20 year old student was troubled.

The Red Flag law didn’t prevent this shooting.

  Mandatory storage laws, which are in effect in Florida, apply to keeping guns locked up when there are minors in the home. The shooter in this situation was a 20 year old student, so the mandatory storage law wouldn’t apply in this situation. 

   Florida State University is a gun-free zone and, in fact, most mass school shootings happen in gun-free zones. Shooters prefer targets that can’t fight back, as their usual goal is to kill as many people as possible. They target people that have no means of returning fire. All the gun laws the Florida State Legislature could have enacted would not have made a difference.  The main objective of this student seems to have been to kill as many people as possible.

   All this shows us is that gun control doesn't work, it has never worked and no matter how many new laws we keep enacting, it won't save lives.  It's not the gun but the person holding the gun. If we removed all firearms, then those wanting to do harm would use knives, vehicles or bombs; all of which have been used in the past.

   We'll always have people that want to harm others, so citizens need to have the ability to protect themselves. Usually by the time law enforcement arrives, the damage has been done, so citizens need the ability to protect themselves.  As the saying goes, when police are minutes away, help is only 1,500 feet per second away. 

Women for Gun Rights issued the following statement which sums it up well: “The brutal attack at Florida State University is yet another tragic reminder that Gun Free Zones don’t stop killers—they stop law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves,” said Dianna Muller, Founder of Women for Gun Rights. “It’s time to stop disarming the innocent and start training and equipping students, faculty, and staff to protect innocent lives.”

Be An Informed Gun Owner  by Tom Rood

You may have heard that in most elections, only about 65% of registered voters bother to vote. The standard answer is “My vote won’t count.” The thing is, there are many elections won or lost by a handful of votes. In one local election a while back, the votes tallied came to a tie. In that election, there was one write in candidate- “Micky Mouse.”  That voter could have decided the election and threw it away. The vote was decided by a coin toss at the board of elections.

Yes, your vote counts. One time my wife and I were going to be away, so we mailed in our ballots. Our Assemblyman won that election by just six votes. Yes, your vote counts. There are many examples of close races resulting in recounts because the election was too close to call.

Why am I bothering you when elections are months/years away? Because it takes time and money to get the word out. What’s the word? INFORMED! Gun owners are not informed as to what is happening behind closed doors in Albany. If they were, perhaps a few more might be motivated to vote. If a few more gun owners voted in the last Governor election, Mr. Zeldon would be our governor, and Ms. Hochul unemployed.

Things you should know about your Second Amendment rights:

Right now, in Albany, legislators are considering bills that would:

1-Limit you to purchasing only one firearm in 30-day period

2-Require you to have 2-year firearm safety training certificate with need to be recertified (read retrained) every 2 years

3-Require you to have 1 million in liability insurance for firearms in your possession

4-Establish a 10-day waiting period after NICS check before firearm can be delivered

5-Establish a 5000-foot gun free zone around schools (5,280 feet = 1 mile). If Mennonite and other Christian schools are included, we might as well figure Yates County becoming a gun free county.

6-And over 20 more anti-gun bills pending.

I am asking you to help get this word out. Talk it up with anyone you know that owns a gun. Any kind of gun. Because if we let Albany and Washington have their way, your ownership and use of firearms will be history. There are billionaires out there financing people, elected officials, and influencing/controlling MSM (main-stream media) to accomplish this goal. You would have to live on Mars not to see what is happening to our Second Amendment Rights.

I began this column several years ago with the idea of influencing gun owners with information about issues that could interfere with their constitutional right to bear arms. I added First Amendment issues later as it became obvious that amendment was being used to influence anti-gun agitators. At the same time, I am advocating non-violence using the ballot box as our method of preserving our way of life. It’s on the line like never before. Trump is in office for four years. What happens in the next presidential election? A lot, maybe most, of what Trump is accomplishing can be lost just as fast.

Be informed, be involved. “A journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step.”

GOSAFE is a No Go

Usually, the gun grabbing left tries to ban semi-automatic firearms based on cosmetic details such as pistol grips, collapsible stocks, and muzzle devices – and don’t forget the left’s favorite - a detachable magazine.

Now, they are going after semi-automatics based on their self-loading mechanisms.

According to the NRA, these are the six self-loading mechanisms for semi-automatic firearms: Recoil, Gas; Short Stroke Piston; Long Stroke Piston; Muzzle Gas Trap; and Blowback/Inertia Operations.

Senators Mark Kelly, (D-Arizona), Michael Bennet, (D-Colorado), Angus King (I-Maine) and Martin Heinrich (D-New Mexico), cosponsored the Gas-Operated Semi-Automatic Firearms Exclusion (GOSAFE) Act which targets a firearm’s gas operating system, which is an extremely common system used in rifles like the AR-15.  The bill defines “gas-operated” as also including blowback-operated and recoil-operated systems as well.

GOSAFE is broader and more restrictive than other types of “assault weapons” bans because it would prohibit rifles like the Ruger Mini-14, a semi-automatic rifle that does not usually get caught up in gun bans.

GOSAFE also includes the usual ban on magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition along with any magazine that can be “readily restored, altered, or converted to accept more than 10 rounds of ammunition.”

GOSAFE also includes a provision that would ban any device that, when attached to a semi-automatic firearm, “materially increases the rate of fire.” This would ban bump stocks and ban premium triggers, aftermarket recoil springs, and other common upgrades that could potentially increase the rate of fire.

Current owners of banned firearms will be allowed to keep them, though those firearms can only be transferred to immediate family members after the bill goes into effect.

Exemptions include: .22 caliber rimfire or less firearms; semi-automatic shotguns; any rifle with a permanently fixed magazine of 10 rounds or less; any handgun with a permanently fixed magazine of 15 rounds or less; recoil-operated handguns.

GOSAFE would charge anyone who possesses a banned rifle or magazine with a misdemeanor and hit them with a fine of up to $5,000 and/or a 12-month prison sentence.

GOSAFE has also been endorsed by the usual suspects: Everytown for Gun Safety, Brady; United Against Gun Violence; Sandy Hook Promise Action Fund; and March for our Lives.  They use the usual misleading characterizations such as “weapons of war.”  With these groups endorsing it, you know it is unconstitutional.

Mark Oliva, managing director of Public Affairs at National Shooting Sports Foundation said, “This legislation is an affront to the Second Amendment and the U.S. Supreme Court’s holdings in the 2008 Heller decision…That decision, of course, held that government cannot ban entire classes of firearms that are commonly owned and commonly used.”

There are over 30 million modern sporting rifles in America today, according to Oliva. (That should qualify as commonly owned and used.)

According to a 2022 survey of hunters by the National Shooting Sports Foundation, 36% used AR-type rifles (what the NSSF calls “modern sporting rifles”) for varmint hunting, 21% used them for hunting small game, and 21% used them for hunting big game.

Another survey by Winchester Ammunition found that 40% of hunters used an AR-platform rifle for hunting in 2021.

Oliva summed it up well when he also said, “Senators Kelly, Heinrich, King and others who attack the rights of law-abiding citizens would rather punish those who obey the law instead of holding criminals responsible for their crimes…Instead of crafting lists of banned rights, these senators should empower law enforcement to protect our communities, hold prosecutors, district attorneys and attorneys general responsible for soft-on-crime policies and mandate that judges lock up criminals instead of turning them back into our communities to prey on our innocent neighbors.”

And speaking of prosecutors, district attorneys and attorneys general…

The gun-grabbers at the Bloomberg-funded Everytown For Gun Safety have announced that they plan to spend millions of dollars to elect state attorney generals who they say will “stand up for the law.” (As they wish the law was written.)  Another of Bloomberg’s bottomless millions going to finance efforts to curtail private gun ownership and kill the Second Amendment.

With a goal of spending $10 million, the group will support the work to elect Democrat AGs in up to 10 key swing states across the 2025 and 2026 election cycles. This will likely include races in Georgia, Minnesota, Nevada, Wisconsin and Virginia.

Letitia James and Fraud

Letitia James ran for and won the office of New York Attorney General (AG) on a platform of sticking it to Donald Trump.  Fulfilling her campaign promise, AG James sued Donald Trump in 2023, accusing him and his family business of engaging in financial fraud to secure favorable loan terms and insurance terms. She claimed Trump did this by inflating the value of his real estate assets. James won a judge’s crazy ruling against Trump for $455 million.  (It’s widely expected to be reversed on appeal.)

But was Letitia James the one who committed real estate fraud to obtain better loan terms?

PJ Media and FOX News reports

As early as July 17, 2023, James had registered a campaign committee-James for NY 2026 – Attorney General (ID 308810) - and filed campaign finance disclosures.  This demonstrates her clear intention to seek re-election as the AG.

On August 17, 2023, one month later, James signed a Power of Attorney to be able to complete a real estate purchase in Norfolk Virginia.  The power of attorney that James signed said, “I hereby declare that I intend to occupy this property as my principal residence.”

On August 30, 2023, the transaction was completed.  The Virginia property at 604 Sterling Street was purchased for $240,000 with a $219,780 mortgage. Per PJ Media, the mortgage documents require James to make the property her principal residence within 60 days (by approximately October 30, 2023) and maintain it for at least one year.

On October 2nd, 2023, James’ suit against Trump for fraud started.

On July 17th, James clearly states she will be running for reelection as AG but on August 17th she clearly states Virginia will be her principal residence.  New York’s Public Officers Law § 30(1)(d) mandates that an office becomes vacant when the officeholder ceases “to be an inhabitant of the state.”

If, in fact, the Virginia property became her principal residence, then she had legally abandoned her position as New York Attorney General. Was she then ineligible to prosecute Trump?  Has she not been the NY AG for the past year and a half?

If she did not take up the Virginia property as her principal residence, then she lied on the Power of Attorney.  This could be important since mortgage rates are lower on primary homes than on secondary or investment properties. A case can be made that she committed fraud to gain more favorable real estate loan rates — pretty much the crime of which she accused Trump!

James may also have tripped federal wire fraud charges with this maneuver. These can carry a fine of up to $1 million and/or 30 years in prison.  Those charges would be brought against Letitia James by President Trump’s Department of Justice.  (Don’t stop laughing!)

It doesn’t stop there.

Both  The Gateway Pundit and FOX News report:

In 2001, Letitia James purchased a four-story multi-family apartment building with five (5) apartments in Brooklyn for $550,000. The Certificate of Occupancy, dated January 26, 2001, says the property is legally classified as a five (5) family dwelling.

In 2005, James refinanced the building with an adjustable loan that started at an interest rate of 7.2% with a ceiling of 10.2%. She declared the building was a four (4) family unit.  Properties with four or fewer units qualify for more favorable “residential” interest rates, while those with five or more are classified as “commercial” properties—often subject to higher rates.

IN 2011, James sought relief from high interest rates by applying under the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP). HAMP had strict eligibility requirements. According to its official Making Home Affordable Program Handbook, “Eligibility is limited to owner-occupied properties with no more than four (4) units.” James listed her property type as: DWELLING ONLY – 4 FAMILY (apartments)

James got the HAMP loan at an interest rate of just 2.7% (down from an estimated 10.2%.) Saving about $44,000 per year.

HAMP warned: “False statements may be punishable by fines, imprisonment, or both under federal law.”  Mortgage fraud under federal law under the jurisdiction of the Department of the Treasury.  Hat’s President Trump’s Department of Treasury.  (Don’t stop laughing yet.)

The Gateway Pundit and FOX News report more.

In the Spring of 1983, Letitia James and her father jointly purchased a home at 114-04 Inwood Street in Queens, New York.  (For Letitia to live in?)  The deed for the property, executed on the same day says the property is being purchased by “ROBERT JAMES AND LETITIA JAMES, his daughter.”

According to New York City Department of Finance records, on May 20, 1983, Letitia James and her father, Robert James, took out a real estate loan from Kadilac Funding Ltd. for $30,300 as “husband and wife.” 

When the James “couple’s” loan was assigned by Kadilac Funding Ltd to The Richard Grill Company and recorded on June 27, 1983, Letitia and her father, Robert James, are once again listed as “husband and wife.”

When they sold the property on May 4, 2000, the document listed the sellers as “ROBERT JAMES AND LETITIA JAMES, HIS WIFE.”

It is guessed that at the age of 24, Letitia James may have had trouble qualifying for a home loan as a single woman with little or no income. She had graduated from CUNY’s Lehman College in 1981 and she would not begin law school at Howard University in Washington, DC, until the fall of 1984 and she was living with her parents. 

Does this qualify as fraud?

Will the ‘legacy media’ cover these before they are forced to do it?

In today’s world it is hard to know what is true and false.  The above seems to be well documented and was publicized on FOX News.  We shall see…

This email went out in January but it is important enough to do a reminder.

Concealed Carry Recertification

Prior to 2013, pistol permits were good for a lifetime and required no recertification. 

In 2013, the NY SAFE Act required pistol permit holders to recertify every five years. This began in January of 2017. Those that certified in 2017 had to recertify five years later, in 2022.

But in late summer 2022, the state tweaked the rules for those who hold a concealed carry permit and they must recertify every three years, not the five that continues to pertain to other permit holders.

So, for those concealed carry permit holders that recertified in 2022 and thought they had five years, guess what?  You will need to recertify this year - 2025

Prior to 2013, lifetime pistol permitting had been typically handled through the county clerks’ offices.  But the SAFE Act granted control of the new pistol permit renewals to the New York State Police.  During the renewal process, handgun owners affirm their basic personal information and that they still own the guns appearing on their permit.

To handle this process an online system was created.

If you want to check your recertification status:

Go to  NYS Pistol Permit Recertification

Click on Check Recertification Status

You will need to know:

 your last name,

date of birth,

drivers license number,

last four digits of your social security number

and that you are not a robot

Click on Check Recertification Status

Your recertification status should then appear.

Laugh or Cry

New Jersey Senator Cory Booker has probably never met a gun control effort he did not like.  Gun control has been a key issue throughout his political career.

He supports stricter gun control measures such as:

Universal background checks

A ban on assault weapons

Requiring a federal gun license,

Limiting handgun purchases to one per month

A national gun buyback program,

Kevin A. Batts, special assistant for Senator Booker was arrested on the grounds of the U.S. Capitol by Capitol Police after failing to go through security carrying a firearm without a proper license.

_________________________________________________________________

Millions of taxpayer dollars pour into Washington D.C.’s anti-violence initiatives.  

Cure the Streets is a D C public safety program to reduce ‘gun violence.’  Cure the Streets hires people with criminal histories as ‘violence interrupters’ because they know first-hand about crime. The program operates in notoriously high-crime sections throughout D.C.  (That covers every place but the White House Rose Garden.)

A Cure the Streets employee, Cotey Wynn, has a record which includes felony murder, first degree murder, possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine, and distribution of a controlled substance.  After becoming a D.C. violence interrupter, Wynn got arrested and charged with a fatal shooting in 2017.  At that time, Wynn was under the supervision of the Pretrial Services Agency for the District of Columbia that believes preventative detention should only be a last resort for defendants, who should live in the least restrictive conditions while awaiting court.

Wynn, was recently arrested and faces a first-degree murder charge related to a nightclub shooting.

The D.C. Office of Neighborhood Safety and Engagement (ONSE) is the umbrella agency that focuses on reducing violence in D. C.

Councilman Trayon White was expelled by the D.C. Council and is scheduled to be tried in 2026.  He took $156,000 in cash payments in exchange for using his position as a D.C. councilman to pressure government employees at ONSE and the Department of Youth Rehabilitation Services to extend several contracts. “The contracts at issue were valued at $5.2 million and were for two companies to provide Violence Intervention services in D.C.,” according to the Department of Justice.

Former Deputy Director Dana McDaniel is another ONSE official nabbed in a bribery scheme.  She has pleaded guilty to accepting at least $10,000 in exchange for using her position to award contracts and grants to businesses owned by a Maryland-based associate.  She faces 15 years in prison.

D.C, has these ‘reimagined’ efforts at bringing down crime and some of the strictest gun control laws in the nation.  Too bad it’s the crooks running the programs.  Maybe guns aren’t the problem.

_________________________________________________________________

NY Assembly bill A3662 was described by Nassau County District Attorney Anne Donnelly as, “It is the most ridiculous thing I have seen in my 36 years in law enforcement.”

The bill would ban cops in the state from stopping and searching drivers over a slew of low-level violations — including the one that ended up nabbing serial killer Joel Rifkin.

(It’s a stretch to call it the “most ridiculous thing” since NYS has set a high bar in that regard.)

_________________________________________________________________

At the Obama Foundation’s 2024 democracy Forum, former President Barack Obama said, “I don't understand how we got so toxic and just so divided and so bitter.”

_________________________________________________________________

Chinese Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Mao Ning posted footage of Mao Zedong, the founder of the Chinese Communist Party.

Mao is probably – no is definitely- the worst mass murderer in history.  Even worse than Stalin, Hitler and the tyrants of old.  Mao is responsible for killing between 30 and 55 million people!

Of course, the current edition of the Communist Chinese Party is emulating Mao in its treatment of the Uyghurs.  And don’t forget the Wuan coronavirus epidemic. 

Movement in the Right Direction

Under 18 USC 922(g), persons prohibited from possessing a firearm include anyone who has been convicted of a crime punishable by more than a year of incarceration, regardless of the sentence that was actually imposed.  It did not matter whether or not the offense involved violence, and no matter how long ago it happened. The law also prohibits gun possession by anyone who has ever been subjected to involuntary psychiatric treatment, even if that person was never deemed a threat to others.

That person who was legally banned from possessing a firearm had to seek relief from this ban / disability by applying to the Department of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms. (ATF)

However, “in the early 1990s, Congress became concerned about the number of resources that ATF was using to adjudicate requests to relieve individual Americans from disabilities on their ownership of firearms. (“The Committee believes that the approximately 40 man-years spent annually to investigate and act upon these investigations and applications would be better utilized to crack down on violent crime.”). Congressional reports also stated that judging whether applicants posed “a danger to public safety” was “a very difficult and subjective task,” id., and that “too many felons . . . whose gun ownership rights were restored went on to commit crimes with firearms.”*

So, the agency you applied to for relief was officially banned from considering the application.  (Bureaucracy at its best!)

Attorney General (AG) Pam Bondi’s Department of Justice recently introduced an interim final rule* that rescinds the delegation of that process to the ATF.

The authority to handle this issue has not yet been transferred to another branch of the DOJ.  Bondi considers this a first step to give the AG a clean slate to work with instead of trying to work around the ATF’s bureaucratic procedures.  Which makes sense since we are dealing with an ATF bureaucracy that has been dedicated to abolishing the 2nd Amendment.   

Erich Pratt, senior vice president of Gun Owners of America said of this: "The [Justice Department's] decision to finally withdraw ATF's authority in this matter is an encouraging sign that this administration is serious about protecting the Second Amendment for all Americans."

The important thing is that we are seeing some tangible positive movement.

*Federal Register :: Withdrawing the Attorney General's Delegation of Authority

Click the link below  MARCH / APRIL Firing Lines

Ulster County  by Frank Riess

The anti gun left will use all means at their disposal to take away our 2A protected rights, including making the permit process bureaucratic, arbitrary and a whole lot more work than it should be.

Frank Reiss just wrote a letter to U S Attorney General Pam Bondi about this and we reproduce it below with his permission and some minor corrections.       

Attorney General Bondi

US Department of Justice
950 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20530‐0001                                                                       

April 2nd, 2025
April 2nd, 2025
Owner Wallkill River Small Arms
2332 Rt 300
Wallkill, NY 12589
DOJ Investigation into California Gun Law Patterns and Practices Should be Expanded

 Honorable Attorney General Bondi,

The law‐abiding gun owners of Ulster County, NY need your help. We are aware of your recent action in Los Angeles County and need the same assistance. The Ulster County Family Court is acting in a way that directly opposes the Constitution of the United States and the laws of New York State. Their actions include but are not limited to:

· Pistol permits routinely take more than a year to obtain

· A judge has to sign an “amendment” to a pistol permit for a permit holder to acquire a new handgun

· Amendments have been routinely taking several months

· Permit holders have been summoned to a court room to testify as to why they need certain or additional firearms

· Permit holders have been told that they cannot purchase additional handguns until they complete more training

· Outright denying amendments for the purchase of certain LEGAL handguns

· HUNDREDS of permit holders have had permits revoked for missing a confusing and unclear recertification process that must be done via the internet

· Permit applicants are quizzed on the law until they get a question wrong and are then denied

· Judges seem to have taken pleasure in humiliating applicants and permit holders in their court rooms

· A judge is currently refusing to renew my NYS Firearm Dealers License over an issue she has with my renewal application. It is the exact application I have used three times. I had to hire an attorney to continue operations so I can feed my family.

My case is still pending.

The actions and missteps being taken by “acting supreme” court judges are harassment and obstruction of government administration. While not new, these anti‐gun actions have increased exponentially starting with the Bruen decision and have now reached a fever pitch with the second election of President Trump. In the past, letters and calls to supervisory judges in Albany fell on deaf ears. I pray that you might have more influence.

Sincerely and Grateful,
Frank Riess

Note:  Here is an artice on the Los Angeles issue to which that Frank Reiss referred.