So what’s new on the legal front with regard to pistol stabilizing braces? Well, as we anticipated in an earlier blog, the Department of Justice did in fact appeal Judge Matthew Kacsmaryk’s ruling in Britto v. ATF to the 5^th Circuit Court of Appeals. One of the ATF’s main arguments is that the Northern District of Texas Court shouldn’t have applied the ruling from Judge Reed O’Connor (also of the Northern District of Texas Court) in the Mock v. Garland case in determining issuance of the nationwide injunction that’s currently in place. You may remember that relief in the Mock v. Garland case included an injunction for members of the Firearms Policy Coalition, Second Amendment Foundation, Gun Owners of America, and others.

Now if that all sounds a bit like legalese word salad, that’s because it kinda is. NGL The short and sweet of it all is that we gun owners still enjoy a nationwide injunction on the pistol stabilizer brace ban that the ATF tried to put in place. The ATF is appealing the injunction at the 5^th Circuit Court of Appeals. Do they stand a chance of winning? Doubtful. The ATF has lost two big cases at the 5^th Circuit in recent years: the bumpstock ban and the ghost gun ban. And those cases weren’t nearly the clear-cut violation of the 2^nd Amendment that this overreach is.

So what’s next, you ask? As we wrote before, the consensus within the legal community is that the 5^th Circuit Court of Appeals will support the injunctive relief and issue a permanent injunction in the coming months. The various lawsuits against the ATF will continue for some years. No doubt that the issue will find itself in front of the U.S. Supreme Court at some point. In the meantime, Americans will be protected by the injunctions

• Pistol stabilizers improve the shooter’s safety and accuracy as the AR pistol is stabilized on their forearm for support. Examples of a pistol stabilizer:
  • Blade Stealth
  • Blade Classic
  • Blade 2M
  • Blade Pistol Stabilizer