Paxton v Dettelbach: Deja Vu all over again

[Sovblocgunfan]

It appears Texas is arguing that suppressors made and remaining in Texas should not be subject to ATF regulation due to the idea that they would not be affected by the Interstate Commerce Clause. I seem to recall Montana tried this 10 or 12 years ago (Montana Shooting Sports v… ?Holder?) and it didn’t amount to anything. Ninth circuit rejected it back then, and SCOTUS denied hearing it. Other than the fact Texas is applying this to suppressors, and Montana was wanting this to apply to all things firearm-related, what’s different this time? The court circuit?

Note: kindly ignore the headline of the brain candy article. It is wrong, as there is no decision from the 5th yet.

MSN

 

[Frank Ettin]

As we often say here, a news article is an inadequate basis for a serious discussion of legal issues.