Fifteen states and the District of Columbia have filed a sweeping lawsuit against the federal government in response to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) backing off enforcement against forced reset triggers (FRTs). According to the official Complaint for Declaratory and Injunctive Relief, the plaintiffs allege that this policy reversal will lead to increased gun violence and place thousands of illegal machinegun conversion devices back into circulation. But Second Amendment advocates like Jared Yanis of Guns & Gadgets say the lawsuit is nothing more than a tantrum by anti-gun states unwilling to accept a lawful outcome.
The Core of the Complaint
Filed in a federal court in Maryland, the lawsuit argues that the ATF’s settlement agreement with Rare Breed Triggers and others violates federal gun laws. According to the states, ATF is not only failing to enforce its own interpretation of the law, one that classified FRTs as machineguns, but is actively distributing these items back to the public. The plaintiff states include New Jersey, Maryland, Delaware, Colorado, Hawaii, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington, and the District of Columbia.
ATF’s Sudden Reversal Sparks Controversy
For years, the ATF had classified FRTs, devices that accelerate a semi-automatic weapon’s firing rate, as prohibited machineguns under federal law. The agency had seized nearly 12,000 such devices and secured injunctions against distributors like Rare Breed. But in May 2025, the ATF settled multiple lawsuits, agreeing to return seized FRTs and halt enforcement. This move has now triggered backlash from blue state attorneys general who claim ATF is abandoning public safety.
Jared Yanis: “Sore Losers and Crybaby States”
Jared Yanis, host of Guns & Gadgets 2nd Amendment News, minced no words in his recent YouTube video. “These crybaby states are using taxpayer dollars to launch another lawsuit that they know they’re going to lose,” Yanis said. He argued that this is nothing more than political theater, using inflated statistics and emotional appeals to “do something” about guns, while ignoring actual constitutional law.
FRTs Are Not Machineguns, Says the 2A Community
One of the most repeated arguments from pro-gun advocates is that FRTs do not meet the legal definition of a machinegun. Yanis explains, “You pull the trigger once, you get one shot. That’s not a machinegun. That’s a semi-auto.” He adds that defining FRTs as machineguns contradicts the clear definition set by Congress and that this entire saga was a result of bureaucratic overreach. The ATF’s change of course is not a threat, he says – it’s a correction.
States Say the ATF Is Endangering Public Safety
The lawsuit claims that returning FRTs will “aid and abet violations of state law,” especially in jurisdictions that have banned such devices outright. It also warns of massive enforcement costs, alleging that local agencies will have to track down and confiscate devices the federal government has just handed back. They estimate significant increases in law enforcement and healthcare burdens, all due to what they describe as the ATF’s reckless retreat.
Statistical Panic vs. Legal Reality
The complaint leans heavily on emotional and alarming statistics: nearly 100,000 gun-related murders over five years, over 5,000 children shot in 2024, and thousands of mass shootings. But Jared Yanis calls these numbers deceptive. “They’re not FBI stats, they’re anti-gun activist numbers,” he said, noting the recent FBI revision of the definition of mass shooting. He points out that many of the incidents listed involved Glock switches, not FRTs, making the states’ focus on FRTs questionable at best.
A Judge With a History of Political Leanings
Yanis also drew attention to the judge assigned to this case, noting he was the same judge who ordered the Trump administration to return a deported MS-13 gang member to the U.S. “This judge is as left as left can get,” Yanis warned, suggesting the court might lean against gun rights regardless of the law. But he also urged viewers not to panic, pointing out that this battle will likely continue through appeals.
What the Lawsuit Really Wants
At the heart of the states’ lawsuit is a plea for the federal court to reimpose restrictions on devices that have already been deemed legal by the terms of the ATF’s settlement. The states are asking the judge to reinstate what Yanis calls “illegal and unconstitutional infringements” on lawful gun owners. He argues that this isn’t about safety – it’s about punishing people who won in court.
The Real Cost of Enforcement
According to the lawsuit, ATF agents have spent 16 to 24 man-hours per retrieval of FRTs. Thousands of hours and untold federal resources were poured into seizing items that the agency now must return. From Yanis’ perspective, this wasteful enforcement proves how flawed the policy was to begin with. “They stole people’s property and now they have to give it back. What a novel idea,” he quipped sarcastically.
The Constitution Isn’t Optional
What stands out in this case is how fast states will abandon constitutional boundaries when they feel threatened. If the courts already ruled in favor of Rare Breed and if FRTs don’t meet the legal definition of machineguns, then it shouldn’t matter how scary they sound. Fear isn’t a valid reason to trample rights. The Constitution doesn’t vanish just because public officials are uncomfortable with its outcomes. And whether you’re a gun owner or not, that precedent matters for everyone.
A Fight That’s Far From Over
The lawsuit filed by these 15 states and D.C. is the latest round in a much larger battle over how the Second Amendment is interpreted and enforced in the U.S. While the gun control side paints this as a dangerous rollback of protections, pro-gun advocates see it as the long-overdue unraveling of government overreach. As the case moves forward, the judge’s rulings – and eventual appeals – will likely define how future firearm accessories are handled under federal law.
Gun Laws Are Changing, and Fast
From Rare Breed’s courtroom win to ATF’s sudden retreat, and now to the furious backlash by state attorneys general, the pace of change around gun laws is picking up. This lawsuit shows that while one side of the political aisle is celebrating a major win, the other is willing to use every tool – legal or otherwise – to fight back. Whether or not this new lawsuit succeeds, one thing is clear: the debate over Second Amendment rights in America is nowhere near settled.
A former park ranger and wildlife conservationist, Lisa’s passion for survival started with her deep connection to nature. Raised on a small farm in northern Wisconsin, she learned how to grow her own food, raise livestock, and live off the land. Lisa is our dedicated Second Amendment news writer and also focuses on homesteading, natural remedies, and survival strategies. Lisa aims to help others live more sustainably and prepare for the unexpected.