Comment on FR Doc # 2026-08932

Subject: Opposition to Proposed ATF Rule "Selecting Biological Sex on ATF Forms" (RIN 1140-AA64) I write in opposition to the Bureau's proposed amendment to 27 CFR 478.21, 479.21, and 555.21, which would require applicants to designate their "immutable biological classification" rather than their current legal sex on ATF forms, including Form 4473. This change is unnecessary, constitutionally suspect, and will harm law-abiding citizens without advancing any legitimate law enforcement interest. The right to keep and bear arms belongs to all law-abiding, responsible citizens, and any rule that makes exercising it harder for one group demands real justification. This proposal offers none. Currently, applicants provide ID consistent with their legal identity, and dealers verify it against the form. This rule breaks that consistency: an applicant whose license, passport, and other government ID reflect their current legal sex would still have to mark a different "biological" classification on the form. That mismatch is not minor. A dealer facing a form that contradicts the presented ID must either proceed with an apparently inconsistent sale or decline it — and the applicant is put in the position of having their transgender status disclosed to a stranger, in front of other customers, as a condition of a routine purchase. For a population already facing disproportionate harassment and violence, this is a foreseeable harm. A rule creating this kind of unique friction for one class of otherwise-eligible buyers, with no comparable burden on anyone else, is hard to reconcile with the principle that this right is not distributed unevenly based on identity. The Bureau's claim that the rule "merely clarifies" existing language and carries no costs cannot be squared with this effect. Separately, the rule does not tell applicants what it requires. A false statement on Form 4473 is a federal felony under 18 U.S.C. 922(a)(6), punishable by up to ten years' imprisonment. Due process requires that a rule with criminal consequences give ordinary people fair notice of what answer is required. This one does not. Many transgender individuals hold birth certificates, licenses, and passports legally amended through their state's own processes. For them, "immutable biological classification" is genuinely ambiguous: answering consistently with current legal documents risks being told later that the answer was wrong under the new standard, while answering according to sex assigned at birth contradicts every current legal document they hold and invites a fraud flag. The rule does not say which answer is correct, and it ignores people whose sex characteristics do not fit a strict binary. A rule that leaves a good-faith applicant unable to determine which answer avoids felony exposure fails the basic fair-notice standard criminal regulations must meet. The existing framework already ties reported sex to legal identification and has functioned without this confusion. The Bureau has not identified any enforcement gap this rule closes, and its cost-benefit analysis overlooks both the burden on transgender applicants' Second Amendment rights and the ambiguity it creates for anyone whose legal documents don't match "biological sex at birth." I urge the Bureau to withdraw this proposal and retain the current standard. Respectfully submitted.