•  
  •  
 
University of Florida Journal of Law & Public Policy

Abstract

This Article explores recent statutory interpretation disputes concerning federal firearms law, focusing on executive agency overreach and the textual limits imposed by the Gun Control Act (GCA) and the National Firearms Act (NFA). Specifically, it scrutinizes the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives’ (ATF) regulatory authority, particularly in defining “frames or receivers” and “machineguns.” This Article details how federal courts relied on canons of statutory interpretation, such as plain meaning and whole act/whole code analysis, to conclude that ATF’s recent interpretations exceeded statutory language and lacked congressional authorization. The first Part analyzes the VanDerStok case, where lower courts initially struck down ATF’s “Frame or Receiver” (ForR) rule, which sought to vastly expand the universe of items that qualify as “firearms” under federal law. The second Part covers Cargill v. Garland, where the Supreme Court ruled that bump stocks are not machineguns under the NFA due to a strict reading of the phrase “single function of the trigger.” The final Part discusses the broader implications of these rulings, including more recent challenges to ATF actions regarding pistol braces and forced-reset triggers. It argues that textualism remains the prevailing method in statutory interpretation, cabining dynamic readings that expand criminal liability. This Article contends that while evolving firearm technologies present unique regulatory challenges—and perhaps even compelling incentives to reform—addressing these issues requires explicit congressional action rather than rulemaking based on executive whim. It warns against the dangers of dynamic statutory interpretation in the penal context and underscores the constitutional necessity of legislative primacy in defining criminal conduct, noting that the firearms context provides a unique perspective on the dangers of dynamic interpretation. Finally, this Article demonstrates how the firearms context shows textualism advancing four key values: (1) fair notice; (2) lenity; (3) the separation of powers; and (4) constitutional avoidance.

Download

Share

COinS