Posted: 8/21/2026 1:09:51 PM EDT
9th Circuit just told California & Giffords Foundation to go fly a kite. https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2026/08/21/24-2701.pdf In California v. ATF, the court ruled that California and the Giffords Law Center lacked Article III standing to challenge "Example 4" of ATF's 2022 frame-and-receiver rule. ATF's rule treats certain partially completed frames and receivers as regulated firearms. But "Example 4" states that an unfinished AR-15 receiver blank is not a firearm when critical interior areas have not been indexed, machined, or formed and it is not sold with instructions, jigs, templates, tools, or equipment that would allow it to be readily completed. California and Giffords argued that ATF should regulate these earlier-stage receiver blanks as firearms too. The Ninth Circuit vacated the district court's ruling that had declared Example 4 unlawful. It ordered the lawsuit dismissed without prejudice for lack of standing. Example 4 remains intact. The federal definition still excludes the described early-stage AR-15 receiver blanks when they lack the critical machining and are not packaged or possessed with the materials necessary for ready completion. |
Join the Community
Your next conversation starts here.
Create your free account to join discussions, share your experience, save topics, and connect with the AR15.COM community.
- Join discussions
- Follow topics and replies
- Connect with fellow enthusiasts
Already a member? Sign in
Stay informed by subscribing to our Newsletter