By: Friedrich Seiltgen

Copyright © 2023

In a September 29, 2023, ruling, Obama-appointed Judge Jill N. Parrish of the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah upheld the BATFE bump stock ban. Parrish denied the Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and granted summary judgment in favor of Defendants pursuant to their motion.

Plaintiff W. Clark Aposhian lawfully owned a Slide Fire bump stock for recreational shooting and target practice. Three weeks after the Final Rule was published, on January 16, 2019, Mr. Aposhian filed suit against the Defendants under seven claims for relief, pleading that the Defendants acted in excess of their constitutional authority and in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. § 500 et seq., by promulgating the Final Rule.

Although the parties suggested that the court ought to engage once again in a best-interpretation analysis of the underlying statute, this court follows the Tenth Circuit’s directive to apply Chevron in reviewing the ATF regulation. And because this court concludes that the regulation is an appropriate exercise of the agency’s discretion to fill gaps implicitly left by Congress, it declines to declare the rule unlawful or enjoin its enforcement.

In the Chevron Decision, the Supreme Court held that a federal court does not need to defer to an agency’s interpretation of a statute if the plain language of that statute provides guidance. However, suppose the statute is ambiguous or silent on an issue. In that case, a federal court must defer to an agency’s interpretation of a statute so long as it is “permissible,” which courts generally have found to mean reasonable or rational.

It’s interesting to note that in her opinion, Parrish states:

“Putting all of this to the side, this court is neither naïve nor ignorant of the possible fate facing Chevron in the Supreme Court. But as it stands now, Chevron is the law of the land, and the Tenth Circuit has declared that Chevron and its progeny provide the proper standard for determining the legality of the Final Rule. Whether or not it is the best such interpretation, the final rule is a reasonable interpretation of the statutory definition of ‘machinegun,’ and it therefore suffices under Chevron.”

I believe the ruling falls under the “this ruling is unconstitutional, but we will uphold it anyway. Maybe the Supreme Court will do their job correctly” doctrine.

Judge Parrish was appointed to the Utah Supreme Court in 2003, where she served until being appointed by President Obama to the Utah Federal District Court in 2015.

That’s all for now, folks! Please keep sending in your questions, tips, and article ideas. And as always – “Let’s Be Careful Out There.”

Friedrich Seiltgen is a retired Master Police Officer with 20 years of service with the Orlando Police Department. He conducts training in Lone Wolf Terrorism Counterstrategies, Firearms, and Active Shooter Response. His writing has appeared in RECOIL, www.floridajolt.com, The Counterterrorist Magazine, American Thinker, Soldier of Fortune, Homeland Security Today, Off Grid, and The Journal of Counterterrorism & Homeland Security International.

Contact him at [email protected].