Impending ‘Pistol Brace’ Rule Seeks to Subvert American Electoral System and Her Citizenry

On June 1st, the Biden administration will launch a particularly egregious assault against law-abiding firearms owners through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)’s “Factoring Criteria for Firearms with Attached ‘Stabilizing Braces’” rule — and Congress may not even vote on the proposed change.

By no stretch of the imagination is this a partisan issue, despite some vulnerable members’ concern that this is a controversial topic — far from it! On the contrary, supporting this rule is the radical position which will require an answer from enraged voters. Since pistols and people with disabilities exist in every congressional district, all constituencies are affected by this rule.

Congressional Research Service estimates up to 40 million pistol braces are in circulation among Americans. When Americans legally bought their ATF-approved pistol braces several years ago and attached it to their firearm — making it more concealable (in theory) but easier for the disabled to use — how could they know that on June 1st, 2023 they would be made de facto felons for their legal purchase?

No member of Congress should want to see any of their constituents face prison time and  enormous fines for buying a device approved by the ATF at the time of purchase, sanctioned by  the Second Amendment, and upheld by numerous Supreme Court decisions including last year’s NYSRPA v. Bruen which affirmed any law related to firearms must conform to American history, text, and tradition. This rule is an unprecedented infringement to the largest scale in American history.

Just yesterday, a three-judge panel in the fifth circuit ruled a preliminary injunction which  protected the particular plaintiffs from Biden’s rule.

Last week Congress commemorated police week, but if we allow this rule to pass without lifting  a finger, we dishonor law enforcement. Few things would do greater harm to the thin blue line  between law enforcement and the civilians they are charged to protect and serve. This rule would pit peaceful Americans against officers obligated to enforce this rule. No officer should  be put into the position to confiscate pistol brace firearms from peaceful civilians who legally  purchased them. What officer wants to carry on their conscience that they imprisoned unaware, physically disabled members of their community? If an objector’s concern is public safety, then know enforcement of this rule will only endanger the American citizenry.

There is no evidence the pistol brace makes firearms more deadly, because a pistol brace is simply a stabilizing component to secure the firearm to the forearm of the operator. Since Obama’s ATF approved its use over ten years ago in 2012, anti-gun activists can only point to three major mass killings in which a pistol brace was used: Boulder, CO; Dayton, OH; Nashville, TN. In none of those cases are they able to explain how the tragedies would have resulted in fewer fatalities if the pistol brace were not legally permitted (or not even used). Falling for this fallacy is a classic example of ignoring evil people, the true cause of violence, and instead, focusing on an inanimate object.

My honorable colleague, Congressman Andrew Clyde, introduced H.J. Res 44, which is the  legislation allowing for congressional disapproval of the ATF rule in March. It was voted on by the Judiciary Committee in April and reported this month. It’s ready for a vote. If given a vote before the deadline, voters will only target their wrath on the radical members who opted to turn peaceful citizens into felons. Voting against this rule will not make or break any campaign — barring a select few areas with the lowest firearm ownership rates. However, not voting for this rule, which affects tens of millions of Americans, will hurt the legitimacy of Congress.

The resolutions of disapproval for executive rules scheduled for a vote this week (S.J. Res. 11,  H.J. Res. 45, and H.J. Res. 39), have 37, 94, and 10 cosponsors, respectively. H.J. Res 44 has  188 cosponsors — twice the amount of the resolution with the most cosponsors scheduled for a  vote this week. This is not to disparage any of the scheduled resolutions in any way. Rather, it is a demonstration of H.J. Res 44’s popularity within Congress.

I realize many of my colleagues are focused on the debt limit negotiations and overall spending — and rightfully so since the issue is of critical importance. It is because the debt limit debate is so important, we should take a vote on H.J. Res 44. With the passage of the Limit, Save, Grow Act, there is demonstrable evidence of unity in the House on fiscal responsibility, where as the fiscally irresponsible are breaking apart at the seams. Adding Clyde’s resolution to the calendar will suck the oxygen out of the detractors from the good-faith negotiations, and be redirected  towards correcting misinformation that a piece of plastic attached to the end of a firearm somehow turns it into a machine gun.

There is also no significant grassroot support for this rule. The billionaire-funded, astro-turf, anti-gun lobby has failed to show sustained support from their donors for this rule. Yet, coalitions of Second Amendment supporters flooded Congressional offices with tens of thousands of  messages begging for a vote, disapproving of the draconian measure since the rule’s final announcement.  As if that weren’t enough, a series of coalition letters from Gun Owners of America demonstrated disapproval by many leaders in the firearm industry, firearm sellers, and firearm influencers; this amounted to a combined audience of over 30 million. Hesitant members will return to their districts and need to explain why they stood with Biden on gun policy — all while he’s polling at a mere 31% approval on that issue among U.S. adults.

Voting on this rule will make it obvious which members support the Second Amendment.  Refusing to act will only hurt my colleagues’ election chances and further deteriorate the trust Second Amendment supporters have with this Congress. If any member still worries opposing Biden’s rule will be harmful in any way to their constituents or election changes, either I or my staff, are happy to have a more detailed conversation. Finally, I want to thank House leadership for taking the concerns of gun owners seriously. The willingness to keep communications open with outspoken pro-Second Amendment members and those on the fence alike is deeply appreciated.