Comment on FR Doc # 2026-08919
Josh AppleOpposeIndividual
Summary: The commenter, an individual who recently administered a firearm estate, opposes the proposed rule because it preserves legal theories they believe were already rejected by the courts. They argue the rule could unfairly expose innocent individuals to prosecution and urge the ATF to rescind the previous framework entirely in favor of a rule that follows plain statutory language.
I oppose this proposed rule as written and urge ATF to rescind the Biden "Engaged in the Business" framework in its entirety rather than issuing a partial replacement that preserves the same legal theories a federal court already rejected in Texas v. ATF. I recently administered an estate that included my father's firearm collection. The retained provisions of this rule could expose innocent estate administrators like me to prosecution as unlicensed dealers. Specifically, I urge ATF to: (1) rescind all retained sections of the 2024 Biden rule, including any provisions allowing routine personal collection activities to be used as evidence of unlicensed dealing; (2) eliminate the assertion that intent alone is sufficient to establish unlicensed dealing, a theory the Texas court rejected; (3) issue a new rule that follows the plain statutory language of federal law and the limits Congress imposed; and (4) clearly reject all legal theories already vacated by federal courts. A rule that survives in fragments still threatens the same law-abiding Americans it targeted from the start. RIN 1140-AB01.