Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

APPEARS IN News

Good News, Bad News on ATF Director Dettelbach

Monday, January 6, 2025

Good News, Bad News on ATF Director Dettelbach

It’s really just good news to report that Joe Biden’s director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), Steven Dettelbach, has announced his resignation.  The bad news only comes into play for President-elect Donald Trump, because he will be denied the pleasure of firing the most political ATF director we’ve ever seen.

Dettelbach, you will recall, wasn’t Biden’s first choice to head the ATF.  That “honor” went to former ATF-employee David Chipman, who went from being an ATF field agent with a possibly questionable background to a shill for anti-gun extremists.  As opposition to Chipman mounted, his nomination failed spectacularly.  He then mounted a grievance campaign, and returned to being paid by anti-gunners to spout his anti-gun nonsense.

After Chipman came Dettelbach—a slightly less controversial but equally anti-gun extremist.  Perhaps the only positive aspect of the Dettelbach nomination was it brought forth more whining from Chipman.

Dettelbach was ultimately confirmed, and under his “leadership,” the ATF did everything it could to execute the Biden agenda of eviscerating the Second Amendment.  It also faced an incredible number of legal challenges to rules the agency implemented without corresponding legislative mandates from Congress.

Just as a refresher on how our government is supposed to work, Congress passes laws, and if the president signs them, his Executive Branch—under which ATF operates—implements the laws.  The key word here is “implements,” not “rewrites,” as in “rewrites to promote a political agenda that Congress did not consider or intend.”

Biden’s ATF, however, took it upon itself to reinterpret and rewrite a number of regulations in spite of the fact that Congress had, in every case but one, not changed the statutes under which those regulations had operated.

For example, there is the new rule regarding pistol stabilizing braces.  These firearm accessories, developed, in part, to help disabled veterans handle certain firearms more safely and with more accuracy, have been around for decades.  Since 2012, ATF had recognized that stabilizing braces serve a legitimate function and the inclusion of a stabilizing brace on a pistol or other firearm does not automatically subject that firearm to the provisions of the National Firearms Act (NFA).

In 2021, the agency began the process to reinterpret existing law to treat brace-equipped pistols the same as short-barreled rifles and fully automatic firearms, rendering them subject to NFA regulations that require enhanced screening of those who own such items, as well as registration, additional fees (taxes), and other requirements.

The rule has been challenged as unauthorized and has faced a number of legal defeats.

Then there’s the “frame or receiver” rule, which changed decades of ATF regulations regarding the definition of a “firearm”—again, without any change to the federal law under which those regulations operated.  We pointed out ATF intended to go beyond what was spelled out in federal law when a draft of the proposed rule was leaked.  We also submitted detailed comments in opposition to the proposal when it was formally published.

This rule is also facing legal challenges, and has been taken up by the Supreme Court.

Then there is team Biden/Dettelbach circumventing Congress by creatively misinterpreting the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (BSCA) to create a new rule that controls when individuals engage in sufficient commerce in firearms so as to need to be licensed under federal law as a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL). Under the rule, Biden’s ATF went well beyond statutory authority to fabricate presumptions of when an individual needs to be an FFL. The rule even hedges its bets against its own legality by claiming it is not meant to apply in criminal proceedings (the most common enforcement actions against unlicensed dealers).

This was an attempt to move the needle on Biden’s desire to implement “universal” background checks, even though the very agency that created this rule has also released data undermining the alleged efficacy of “universal” background checks to address crime involving firearms.

Twenty-six states filed suits challenging this rule, as did NRA.

Besides creatively reimagining federal firearm laws, ATF has faced scrutiny over how it has operated under Dettelbach, including a controversial operation in Arkansas the led to the death of the subject being investigated.  There were also questions asked of Dettelbach regarding an alleged ATF-linked Mexico gun trafficking scheme, raising the specter of the Obama-Biden administration’s Operation Fast and Furious scandal.

Dettelbach, apparently fancying himself as media-friendly, even took to television to push his anti-gun ATF propaganda. The results were cringe-inducing.

The fact that Dettelbach quit before he could be fired is just the final nail in the coffin of one of the most blatantly anti-gun political appointees of the Biden administration.  His resignation all but confirms his tenure had little to do with heading an agency ostensibly dedicated to public safety by targeting the most dangerous firearm-related crimes and criminals.  Otherwise, why quit?  If he were as dedicated to professional law enforcement as he claimed, one would think he would stay on, make his case with Trump, then let the chips fall where they may.

On the other hand, if his goal and mandate were to target and harass law-abiding gun owners as well as firearm manufacturers and dealers, it would make sense that he would leave before Trump took office. There is certainly no future in that line of business under the Trump-Vance administration. 

While it is a shame that President-elect Trump will not have the satisfaction of firing someone who should never have been nominated to run the ATF, it is still good he will be gone.

He will not be missed, but we look forward to seeing who will be appointed to replace him.

TRENDING NOW
California: Governor Newsom Signs Gun Control Bills Into Law

Monday, October 13, 2025

California: Governor Newsom Signs Gun Control Bills Into Law

For someone who has claimed to be"...deeply mindful and respectful of the Second Amendment and people’s Constitutional rights,” Governor Gavin Newsom has once again proven that actions speak louder than words.

Firearm Prohibition Advocates Mute on Jay Jones “Two Bullets to the Head” Scandal

News  

Monday, October 13, 2025

Firearm Prohibition Advocates Mute on Jay Jones “Two Bullets to the Head” Scandal

Democrat Jay Jones, candidate for Virginia attorney general, still has not suspended his campaign, even as pressure mounts over disclosures that should disqualify, to put it mildly, any individual from serving as the chief law ...

First Affirmative Lawsuit in Support of Gun Owners Filed by Trump’s DOJ

News  

Monday, October 6, 2025

First Affirmative Lawsuit in Support of Gun Owners Filed by Trump’s DOJ

California officials’ egregious foot-dragging over the issuance of carry permits has finally attracted the ire of the federal Department of Justice (DOJ). 

FBI Persists in Underreporting Armed Citizen Defensive Gun Use

News  

Monday, October 13, 2025

FBI Persists in Underreporting Armed Citizen Defensive Gun Use

Three years ago, Dr. John Lott of the Crime Prevention Research Center (CPRC), writing for RealClearInvestigations, described how the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) was vastly undercounting, “by an order of more than three the number of instances in ...

NRA Files Lawsuit Challenging California’s Glock Ban

Monday, October 13, 2025

NRA Files Lawsuit Challenging California’s Glock Ban

Today, the National Rifle Association—along with Firearms Policy Coalition, Second Amendment Foundation, Poway Weapons & Gear, and two NRA members—filed a lawsuit challenging California’s Glock ban.

NRA Files Another Lawsuit Challenging the National Firearms Act

Thursday, October 9, 2025

NRA Files Another Lawsuit Challenging the National Firearms Act

Today, the National Rifle Association—along with the American Suppressor Association, Firearms Policy Coalition, and Second Amendment Foundation—announced the filing of another lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA).

Rehearing En Banc Sought in NRA-Supported Challenge to New Jersey’s Carry Restrictions

Wednesday, October 8, 2025

Rehearing En Banc Sought in NRA-Supported Challenge to New Jersey’s Carry Restrictions

Today, the National Rifle Association announced the filing of a petition for rehearing en banc in Siegel v. Platkin, a challenge to New Jersey’s carry restrictions.

US Virgin Islands: Sweeping Gun Control Measures Advance

Wednesday, October 8, 2025

US Virgin Islands: Sweeping Gun Control Measures Advance

The 36th Legislature of the US Virgin Islands is continuing to advance sweeping gun control measures through the legislative process.

NRA Files Amicus Brief Urging SCOTUS to Hear Challenge to Ban on Firearms Possession by Nonviolent Felons

Thursday, October 9, 2025

NRA Files Amicus Brief Urging SCOTUS to Hear Challenge to Ban on Firearms Possession by Nonviolent Felons

Today, the National Rifle Association, along with the Second Amendment Foundation, Firearms Policy Coalition, and FPC Action Foundation, filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to hear a challenge to the federal lifetime prohibition on ...

North Carolina: Update on Permitless Carry

Tuesday, September 30, 2025

North Carolina: Update on Permitless Carry

Last week the North Carolina General Assembly briefly returned from recess and re-referred Senate Bill 50, Freedom to Carry NC, to the House Rules Committee.

MORE TRENDING +
LESS TRENDING -

More Like This From Around The NRA

NRA ILA

Established in 1975, the Institute for Legislative Action (ILA) is the "lobbying" arm of the National Rifle Association of America. ILA is responsible for preserving the right of all law-abiding individuals in the legislative, political, and legal arenas, to purchase, possess and use firearms for legitimate purposes as guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution.