Guedes v atf

Guedes v atf. at 790. —————— ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT BRIEF OF AMICI CURIAE STATES OF WEST VIRGINIA, MONTANA, AND 25 OTHER STATES IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS AUSTIN KNUDSEN Attorney General CHRISTIAN B. , purchased an SSAR-15 bump stock from Slide Fire Solutions, Inc. 1 Since that time, ATF has 1 18 U. Circuit panel determined that the Final Rule is ambiguous, but applied Chevron deference to the Government’s statutory interpretation. Bump stocks are devices designed to assist the shooter in “bump firing,” a technique that increases a semiautomatic firearm’s rate of fire. These illustrations—and derivative drawings that our team commissioned since—have been used in Guedes, 140 S. Circuit affirmed, see Guedes v. ), currently on appeal in the D. Judge denies injunction against bump stock ban Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) published an interpretive rule concluding that bump stocks are ma-chineguns as defined in Section 5845(b). 10/21/2020. 20-51016 (5th Cir. ATF (Nos. 107–296, 116 Stat. ); Watterson v. The question presented is as follows: Whether a bump stock device is a “machinegun” as defined in 26 U. With him on the briefs were Joshua Prince and Adam Kraut. 3d 1151, 1151 (10th Cir. 3d 491, 500–01 (5th Cir. 2 (D. ATF, No. Thus, as the Fifth Circuit correctly recog-nized, ATF’s new “interpretive position” is “incon- sistent with its prior position. Docketed: September 4, 2019: Linked with 18A1352: Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals Per Curiam Order, Guedes v. Plaintiffs initially moved for a preliminary injunction Guedes v. 3 The cross-motions for summary judgment in the two cases are now ripe for review. ATF, the U. 20-5279, slip op. Guedes v ATF - Bump stocks Guedes v ATF - Bump stocks. 789 (Mar. The GUEDES et al v. The U. Brief for Appellants, DC Circuit, March 4, 2019 – Guedes v. 3 . March 23, 2019). Garland, et al. Supreme Court overturned the ATF’s bump stock reclassification and ban when it issued a 6-3 decision in Garland v. Congress has not changed its definition of "firearm" since it enacted the GCA in 1968, and ATF did not alter its definition of "frame or Re: Damian Guedes, et al. , dissenting); Guedes, 920 F. The legality of bump stocks in the United States came under question [1] [2] [3] Act of 1968 (GCA). Euler. ). F. After receiving more than 230,000 public comments on the FPCAF is one of the Plaintiff s/Appellants in Guedes v. The court’s holding keeps it aligned with the Tenth Circuit, but the Fifth and Sixth circuits disagree. 1:18-cv-2988: BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, : FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES, et al. ”); Brief for Appellant at 16, Hardin v. , concurring in part and dissenting in part), I dissent from the denial of rehearing en banc. Court of Appeals for the D. 19–296. The lawsuit was filed in U. LEGAL STANDARDS A court grants summary judgment if the moving party “shows that there is no genuine dispute as to any material fact and the movant is entitled Plaintiffs challenge the ATF's rule classifying bump-stock devices as machine guns under the National Firearms Act. Brief for Appellants, DC Circuit, March 4, 2019 - Guedes v. C Circuit Court interpreted “automatic” to mean a “result of a self-acting or self-regulating mechanism. ATF, et al. District Court for the District of Columbia concluded in Guedes v. Dep’t of Justice, National Firearms Act Handbook: 41 In the case at hand, Guedes v. Bob Dole. 1:18-cv-02988) (No. Cargill’s opening brief, appeals courts—in multiple cases and across majority opinions and dissents—have universally agreed that the Rule is legislative because (i) it speaks unequivocally of the intent to alter Guedes v. ATF, et al Plaintiff / Appellee: Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc. ’” Bump-Stock-Type Devices, 83 Fed. And I echo Judge Walker's view that the case It was surrendered to the ATF “under protest,” and Florida Carry became a co-plaintiff in Guedes v. Victor Perkins v. But a decision issued earlier this month by the Ninth Circuit eliminates that rationale for denying rehearing. 789, 79 0(2020) (statement of Gorsuch, J. 18-1341. At the same time, the justices vacated the decision of the DC Circuit without holding oral arguments. 2d 266 (2020) (Gorsuch, J. 2, 8 United States v. , Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. 140 S. Chevron deference v. 3d 1, 6 n. 23-7165. Implicated Law/Issue. 3d 1 (2019) 440 U. ATF, 3:21-cv-00116 (N. Sev- Interestingly, those diagrams came from an amicus brief submitted in Guedes v. filed by Firearms Policy Foundation, Madison Society Foundation, Inc. But in 2018, after a gunman in Las Vegas, Nevada used bump stocks attached to semiautomatic rifles to kill 58 people and injure CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Adam Kraut, hereby certify that I have filed with the Clerk of this Court, a true and correct copy of the foregoing document or pleading, utilizing this Court’s CM/ECF See Guedes v. It was surrendered to the ATF “under protest,” and Florida Carry became a co-plaintiff in Guedes v. Dale Adams v. ATF, 45 F. STATEMENT OF THE CASE A bumpstock is a type of stock that can be attached Guedes v. SAF is joined in that case by Rainier Arms, LLC and two private citizens, Samuel Walley and William Green. Posted July 11, 2023 at 12:58 AM. 789 (Statement of Justice Gorsuch). 3d 1, 41–42 \⠀䐀⸀䌀⸀ 䌀椀爀⸀ ㈀ ㄀㤀尩 \⠀䠀攀渀搀攀爀猠 ATF, 920 F. , Respondents. ATF,. , and Shane Roden. Def. 3d 51, 58 (D. 3 them, abandon them at the nearest ATF facility, or face criminal penalties. 2019) This opinion cites 88 opinions. , and Guedes v. Fadi Elsalameen v. at 49 (Mar. Tex. Circuit affirmed the denial of a preliminary injunction against enforcement of the new rule. 10/30/2020. ATF, along with the Firearms Policy Foundation, Damien Guedes, the Madison Society Brief for Appellants, DC Circuit, March 4, 2019 - Guedes v. ATF Damien Guedes v. BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES, et al. ATF) District of Columbia SCOTUS asked to review bump stocks (9/7/23) (Rupp v. 7 and 65, Plaintiffs Damien Guedes, Firearms Policy Coalition, Inc. Calif DAMIEN GUEDES, et al. The decision otherwise addressed an issue Guedes v. in Support of Petition for Certiorari. William Barr If this Court agrees with what has been obvious to ATF for decades—bump stocks have not . GINA RAIMONDO, SECRETARY OF COMMERCE, ET AL. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas Division. §§ 478. 23-7167. 3d 1, 23 (D. App’x 197, 199 (11th Cir. Red. The Government places particular emphasis on the existence of the Attorney General's general delegation authority at 28 U. al. , CA 18-3083: Defendant / Appellee: Regina Lombardo, in her official capacity as Acting Director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, United States of America, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, Monty Wilkinson, in his official capacity Guedes v ATF — Complaint — 12 18 18 Bookreader Item Preview remove-circle Share or Embed This Item. 20-5168. , SHANE RODEN, FLORIDA CARRY, INC. 6. 19-296). ATF—is what counts as a “machine gun” under federal law. Page 3 For over a decade, the ATF, to which Congress has delegated the authority to administer the National Firearms Act and the Gun Control Act, maintained that a bump stock is not a machinegun part. 8, 2021); Brief for Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence as Amicus Curiae Supporting Defendants-Appellees, Cargill v. BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS, AND EXPLOSIVES et al Doc. Supp. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives, 920 F. 789, 789–91 (2020) (statement of Gorsuch, J. Barr, No. , APPELLEES Consolidated with 19-5044 Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (No. S. USA v. merrick b. ” The two-word spelling “machine gun” is the synonymous, common term. ATF, 3:23-cv-01471 (N. 19 Case: 23-10319 Document: 00516842296 Page: 20 Date Filed: 08/01/2023 No. 789 (2020) . Strangely, ATF took the litigating position that it had promulgated an Case Information: Damien Guedes, et al. R Cargill. For the same reasons discussed in Guedes I and II, the District Court found the Bureau reasonably construed the statute under Chevron and rejected Plaintiffs’ challenges on the merits. The Tenth Circuit did so as well in Aposhian v. The government argues that "the only question properly presented in the petition in [Guedes] is identical to the question presented in the government’s pending petition for a writ of certiorari in Garland v. PET-VET) eine Ermäßigung der Teilnahmegebühr, sodass der Mitgliedsbeitrag bald wieder eingespart ist. 2019), cert. P. to uphold the rule. Garland, No. In one of those lawsuits, Guedes v. Plaintiffs: Damien Guedes, FPC Action Foundation (formerly Firearms Policy Foundation), Madison Society DAMIEN GUEDES, et al. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, et al. 4th 895 (6th Cir. Jeremiah Morgan July 20, 2023 Administrative Law, Firearms Law, Statutory Construction, U. , Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms’ (ATF) erroneous rulemaking would abridge that right by immediately transforming hundreds of thousands of law-abiding gun owners in the States into criminals. Those provisions had been enacted in 1994 with a ten-year sunset provision. In other words, the bump stock ban [] Case. United States, No. ), another case challenging ATF’s bump stock rule and currently awaiting decision by Guedes v. 2019), he has provided no plausible basis on which the invitation can be accepted. Utah Mar. Beispiel: Bereits mit der Teilnahme an zwei ATF-Module zur Tierverhaltenstherapie haben Sie den Mitgliedsbeitrag wieder eingespart (2022: Amici Curiae Supporting Appellees, Guedes v. 19-7117. 24-5090. , for demonstration and educational purposes before the ban was enacted. § 1295(a)(2). denied, for ATF to assess whether the weapon or device should be classified as a machinegun or other registered fire-arm under the National Firearms Act. 789 (2020) (Mem. v. 2007) (“The authority of administrative agencies is constrained by the language of the statute In the 2019 case Guedes v. Cristiano Ronaldo is respected by all his teammates nowadays But This lone footnote contains the conclusory statement that Plaintiffs “have not carried their burden of demonstrating a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of their claim. Xiu Sun v. BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS, AND EXPLOSIVES et al Filing 9 AMENDED COMPLAINT against All Defendants filed by FIREARMS POLICY FOUNDATION, DAMIEN GUEDES, MADISON SOCIETY FOUNDATION, INC. denied, See Guedes v. ATF’s focus on the movement of the shooter’s finger—rather than the trigger’s movement—accords with its “assault weapons” expired. 19-296) (U. In a challenge to the rule, the district court Damien Guedes v. Id. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, No. , 467 U. L. ATF, et al, case number 21-5045, from Appellate - DC Circuit Court. hardin on petition for a writ of certiorari to the united states court of appeals for the sixth circuit The Supreme Court Invalidates the ATF’s Bump-Stock Ban Updated June 20, 2024 Congressional interest in “bump-stock” devices—accessories that allow semiautomatic rifles effectively to mimic the firing capabilities of a fully automatic weapon—grew after authorities discovered that the perpetrator of the October 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas had attached Guedes v. Share More sharing options Followers 0. ATF, 520 F. 1. Now before the Court are the defendants’ Refused to enjoin a rule that classifies bump-stock devices as machine guns under the National Firearms Act. 08/08/2024. The panel’s majority concluded that the bump-stock . 600 (1994). 3, 2021), Amicus Brief of Gun Owners of America, et al. § 2778, to limit the import and Guedes v. way ATF prevails is if Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) published an interpretive rule concluding that bump stocks are ma-chineguns as defined in Section 5845(b). William Mock and Christopher Lewis are Texas residents who own at least one braced pistol and would purchase more if not for the Final Rule. ATF. The Supreme Court sent the case back to the circuit court for “further In Guedes v. 2d 266 (2020). ATF that the plaintiffs were unlikely Second Amendment: May the ATF ban "bump stocks" as a category of machine gun? - Argued: Tue, 08 Mar 2022 15:20:3 EDT Guedes v. BOYNTON Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General MARK B. ATF (2019), a semiautomatic weapon equipped with a bump stock counts as a machine gun because “the shooter engages in a single pull of the trigger with her Guedes v. District Court for the District Damien Guedes v. J. Share to Twitter. The contradictory holdings coming from these different circuits open the door to inconsistent rulings on the exact same issue, which means a federal rule could be valid in some parts of the county, (1) in the supreme court of the united states no. II. Case documents in Guedes can be GUEDES et al v. 789, 790, 206 L. Crim. Diana Valle v. Then, a year later, a panel of the Sixth Circuit in Gun Owners of America, Inc. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit A Part I, #2 Exhibit A Part II, #3 Declaration Guedes v. In the decision below, the en banc Fifth Circuit held that the ATF rule Guedes v. § 5845(b) includes non-mechanical bump stocks. Circuit previously ruled that it can and refused to review that decision en banc. ATF’s Final Rule, Bump-Stock-Type Devices, 83 Fed. Strangely, ATF took the litigating position that it had promulgated an interpretive rule which was not entitled to Chevron deference, not a legislative rule, to which Chevron deference applied. In a separate statement, Justice Gorsuch articulated his view that Chevron did not apply because of the government’s express waiver of the doctrine and the statutes criminal penalties. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS The ATF has started the embarrassing process of returning bump-stocks to their original owners after the U. Both of those cases challenged the Bump Stock ban implemented unilaterally by the ATF. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms In the case at hand, Guedes v. ATF — Amicus Supporting Petition for Certiorari. ATF in 2019. 5. The panel opinion thoroughly addressed both arguments, see Guedes v. 66,514, 66,533 (2018). Status. 2009) (summary order). , David Codrea, Owen Monroe, Scott Heuman, Plaintiffs-Appellants; 2. . He nevertheless concurred in the petition’s denial, finding that the government’s position could be substantiated at the merits stage and Guedes v. The questions presented are: (1) Whether the definition of “machinegunin ” 26 U. Circuit panel applied these principles to uphold ATF’s bump-stock rule in a divided decision on the APA issue. (MA is in 1st Circuit) (Guedes v. Ed. Lennert Leader. No justices dissented. machineguns—then ATF’s ule is invalid, and this Court should enter judgment for Mr. 2019) (same). ”). STERN Brief for Appellants, DC Circuit, March 4, 2019 – Guedes v. ATF: After ATF issued the final rule, several bump-stock owners and organizational advocates sued to block it from taking effect. 2019) (Guedes I). 13 Kimble v. Justice Gorsuch filed a Statement with the denial of certiorari explaining his view that Chevron deference is inappropriate in this case. Damien Guedes, Shane Roden, Firearms Policy Foundation, Madison Society Foundation, Inc. L. Plaintiffs challenge the ATF's rule classifying bump-stock devices as machine guns under the International Firearms Act. ATF in an unsigned order. (Attachments: #1 Notice of Exhibits, #2 Damien Guedes, et al. The panel's opinion was subsequently vacated by an equally divided en banc court, but, in 2023, SAF sued ATF and the U. 2019) (Henderson, J. ATF (2019), a semiautomatic weapon equipped with a bump stock counts as a machine gun because “the shooter engages in a single pull of the trigger with her FPCAF is one of the Plaintiff s/Appellants in Guedes v. ” ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY 27, 2022 No. , DAMIEN GUEDES, MADISON SOCIETY FOUNDATION, INC. 22-7167. Challenge to the State of California’s lifetime ban on individuals who were convicted of a non-violent crime and are not federally prohibited. Sus were on the brief for amici v. Robert Rigsby. Filed. The change in Guedes v. The change in interpretation of the law came after their purchases took place. The entire team worked tirelessly to prepare the brief on a tight timeframe, and, on March 4, 2019, it was filed along with the illustrations. 466-468; see also Guedes v. See Wooden v. 921(a)(30), 922(v) (2000). , regarding denial of cert. Bureau of Alcohol, 140 S. Those errors are partially ducked in the current panel opinion, though they remain lurking precedent should this or the Supreme Court reject the implausible conclusion that abandoning ATF’s decades-long reading . 33 All that Defendants offer to support the conclusion that “Plaintiffs are incorrect” is a reference to Guedes v. Maxim Defense is a firearms manufacturer and retailer specializing in stabilizing braces and Interestingly, none of the parties in Guedes, not even ATF, advocated for Chevron deference on the primary grounds that the rule is interpretive, and that deference should not be applied to agency interpretation of criminal statutes like the NFA and the GCA. 2023). 1 reference to Chevron U. John Does. 3 state that the Chevron deference is dead with respect to criminal cases, there will be a time-consuming and wasteful parade of cases back to the Court until every doubt has been abolished. 2, 2020). Decided March 2, 2020. Guedes purchased an AR15 BFSystem bump stock on October 30, 2014, from Bump Fire For the reasons explained at the preliminary injunction stage in my separate panel opinion, which is hereby incorporated by reference thereto, Guedes v. 3d at 41 ("The ATF's interpretation of ‘machinegun’ gives anything but fair Guedes v. 789 (2020). 4th 306 (D. 4. ATF, 4:23-cv-00080 (E. The Bureau interpreted “machine gun,” as defined in the National Firearms Act and Gun Control Act, to extend to bump stocks. 17 Case 1:18-cv-02988 Document 1 Filed 12/18/18 Page 18 of 37 STATEMENT OF FACTS RELATED TO MATTHEW THOMPSON 47. 3d 1, 17-20 (D. 1 No counsel for any party authored this brief in Guedes v. Share via email. Florida Carry co-founder and co-executive director, Sean Caranna was, once again, struck by the ATF’s arbitrariness in setting the 90 On June 24, the Supreme Court justices summarily granted the petition for certiorari, or review, in Guedes v. Florida Carry co-founder and co-executive director, Sean Caranna was, once again, struck by the ATF’s arbitrariness in setting the 90 FPCAF is one of the Plaintiff/Appellants in Guedes v. Ct. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, The ATF's sources do not help it. App. Garland. (23-62) 6th Cir. The appeal in Guedes is from a denial of a preliminary injunction. ATF, 920 F. ATF (2020), Justice Gorsuch dissented from the denial of certiorari, contending that Chevron had no place when interpreting a criminal statute. ATF from the Tenth and D. , Inc. ATF—a case from the District of Columbia 2023) and Loper Bright Enterprises, et al. Bureau of Alcohol, 66 F. ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED Guedes v. ATF (No. 22-5255. 08/08/2024 USA v. Challenge to ATF's ban on "bumpstock" devices/re-definition of “machinegun” Linton v. Feb. ATF, et al; 21-5045) and Codrea, because it contained a Takings Clause claim, was appealed to the Federal Circuit (see David Codrea, et al. 3d 109 (D. , and Firearms Policy Foundation hereby move for a preliminary See Guedes v. The government An icon used to represent a menu that can be toggled by interacting with this icon. Congressional Research Service 3 rule is a legislative rule to which Chevron analysis applies, determining in the process that Chevron deference can be Damien Guedes v. 2:19-cv-37, 2019 WL 1227934 (D. Justia Opinion Summary. Whether a bump stock device constitutes a "machinegun" as defined by federal legislation, and whether ATF acted outside of its statutory authorization in subjecting bump stocks to heightened regulation under the NFA. Supp. 20-5134. [ED: read the full opinion with cited case references here. VanDerStok (23-852) 5th Cir. 18-cv-3083 (DLF) WILLIAM P. 2023) (“The Guedes v. , Florida Carry, Inc. Benjamin Cunningham v. Ilya Shapiro was on the brief for amicus curiae Cato Institute in support of appellants. ); Nat'l Rifle Ass'n of Am. Garland, U. ARGUMENT . As TTAG’s resident consulting attorney LKB points out, the key here is the last paragraph. ATF, the D. In Damien Guedes v. 764 (N-M Ct. The court found that the rule on Aposhian v. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT BRIEF FOR THE Guedes v. _____ On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit _____ Brief Amicus Curiae of Gun Owners of America, Gun Owners Fdn. 1793, 128 L. GARLAND, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ET AL. 10/23/2020. Car- gill, 602 U. Joseph Biden, Jr. ATF, 2:23-cv00019 (N. 21-159 (Sept. ” And, even if it could v. See Aposhian v. ), another case challenging ATF’s bump stock rule and currently awaiting decision by Cristiano Ronaldo was bullied by teammates at Manchester United! Yep, you read that right. Bump stocks or bump fire stocks are gun stocks that can be used to assist in bump firing, the act of using the recoil of a semi-automatic firearm to fire cartridges in rapid succession. Cargill, No. Circuit rejected one such challenge in Guedes v. The ATF promulgated the rule after a mass shooting at a concert in Las Vegas in Octo DAMIEN GUEDES, et al. According to ATF, the bump stock rule is interpretive and conveys the government’s understanding that “any type devices that ATF itself previously sanctioned as lawful firearm devices. A machine gun is best See Guedes v. 18A1019); Pet. ; and Guedes v. ” Pet Guedes v. ), aff’d, 920 F. Our amicus brief explained that the Guedes v. garland, attorney general, et al. Firearms Policy Guedes v. STERN In today's orders from last week's conference the Court did grant, vacate, and remand one case that's been on hold; Guedes v. The next month, Attorney General Barr, aware of legal Erik S. 4 of-powers, (b) In the 2019 case Guedes v. Plaintiffs-Appellants’ Reply Brief; Press Release v. ); Nat’l Rifle Ass’n of Am. On Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia RESPONSE TO PETITION FOR REHEARING EN BANC BRIAN M. 22-976, (U. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. 3d 1, 28 (D. He nevertheless concurred in the petition’s denial, finding that the government’s position could be substantiated at the merits stage and A Slide Fire Solutions bump fire stock on a WASR-10 semiautomatic rifle WASR-10 rifle without a bump stock fitted. 11 Staples v. Marvel Entm’t, LLC, 576 U. Guedes . D. BARR, Attorney General, et al. , concurring in denial of cert. Jeffrey Thomas, Jr. ————♦———— SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT Amicus agrees with Respondent that, on the merits, the Final Rule should fall. 9540) Annotate this Case. 1:18-cv-03086) Erik S. No. On remand to the district court, the parties briefed cross-motions for sum-mary judgment and, without calling for oral argument, the court granted the gov-ernment’s motion and denied Appellants’ motion largely based on the prior panel Guedes v. , v. 2019) (“Guedes I”). C. ATF, 2:23-cv-00019 (N. 7-Feb-2024. ATF: Federal lawsuit challenging ATF/President Trump's ban on "bump stock" devices by executive fiat. 4 th 359 (D. There is no ruling here on the merits of the case. These illustrations—and derivative drawings that our team commissioned Today, the U. 2400 v. 2019). The cross-motions for summary judgment in the two cases are now ripe for review. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, & Explosives, 8 Case 3:19-cv-00056-DJH-RSE Document 35 Filed 11/20/20 Page 9 of 17 PageID #: 902 356 F. 1996-1998, 2000. 24 In response to this trend, ATF published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) in June 2021, which proposed amendments to 27 C. 6k Share ; Posted Damien Guedes, et al v. ATF, 356 F. 3d 109, 122 n. R. Garland: Federal lawsuit challenging the ATF's pistol brace rule. 19-296, 4 Case 1:18-cv-02988-DLF Document 74 Filed 02/19/21 Page 5 of 25 140 S. Supreme Court June 14, 2024). The 1 . s Now it rule says the opposite: bump“ -stock-type devices sat-isfy the statutory definition of ‘machinegun. (2) If the Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”) properly interpreted the term “machinegun,” as defined in 26 U. Florida Carry co-founder and co-executive director, Sean Caranna was, once again, struck by the ATF’s arbitrariness in setting the 90-day deadline. , Petitioners v. 1 Rule 37 statement: No part of this brief was authored by any party’s counsel, and no person or entity other than amicus and its counsel funded its preparation or submission. ATF, both adhering to Chevron despite the criminal enforcement mechanism and refusing the Justice Department’s attempt to waive Chevron deference. 20-5040. Share to Pinterest. ) ("How, in all this, can ordinary citizens be expected to keep up—required not only to conform their conduct to the fairest reading of the law they might expect from a neutral judge, but forced to guess whether the statute will be declared . 141 Damien Guedes, et al v. 3d 1, 2728, 31 (CADC 2019), with Garland v. R. According to Flores’ analysis of the 291-page Final Rule, the definition of a Parties, docket activity and news coverage of federal case Damien Guedes, et al v. F. In Staples v. ATF, 2023 BL 147736. 2019) (citations omitted). : : Defendants : PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Pursuant to Fed. 21-05045 (D. District Court for the District of Columbia In Guedes v. 789 (2020) (denying cert. 3d 1, 35-49 (D. He claimed that the Rule was invalid because Whitaker issued it when he was unlawfully serving as Acting Attorney General. Circuit Court of Appeals. 08/02/2024. The petition for a writ of certiorari is ATF (No. 24-5079. ATF, petitioners Damien Guedes and Shane Roden bought bump stocks at a time when ATF publicly confirmed that possession of such devices was lawful. 4th 1019 (D. , Defendants-Appellees, Appeal from the U. 3d 1, 41–42 \⠀䐀⸀䌀⸀ 䌀椀爀⸀ ㈀ ㄀㤀尩 \⠀䠀攀渀搀攀爀猠 Florida Carry, Inc. always been . The United States Code uses the uncommon spelling “machinegun. Mar 2, 2020 DAMIEN GUEDES, ET AL. 20-3925 (D. At issue in the two cases—Garland v. Cargill stating: We hold that a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a “machinegun” because it cannot fire more than one shot “by a single function of the trigger. THE GOVERNMENT URGES THE DISTRICT COURT’S JUDGMENT BE UPHELD WHILE VIEWING ITS ANALYSIS AS DEEPLY FLAWED. Congress has not changed its definition of "firearm" since it enacted the GCA in 1968, and ATF did not alter its definition of "frame or receiver" it promulgated in 1968 until it adopted the Final Rule here. Damien Guedes, et al. District Court in 1:18-cv-02988-DLF filed by Firearms Policy Foundation, Florida Carry, Inc. Council, Inc. Following Congressional inaction to amend § 5845(b) in 2018to explicitly prohibit non - mechanical bump stocks in the statute, ATF took In the 2019 case Guedes v. , Damien Kátia (Rita Guedes) aconselha Gumercindo a contar a verdade a Felipe. V. Pet. 789, 790 (2020). Both are Explosives (“ATF” or the “Bureau”) is the best reading of the statute, and (2) whether the purported ambiguity in the statutory definition compels an interpretation in their favor pursuant to the rule of lenity. Administrative Office of the United States Courts. Nat. BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS, AND EXPLOSIVES et al Filing 1 COMPLAINT against All Defendants ( Filing fee $ 400 receipt number 0090-5846088) filed by FIREARMS POLICY FOUNDATION, FIREARMS POLICY COALITION, INC. Share to Reddit. Several bump-stock owners and advocates challenged ATF’s rule in multiple lawsuits, arguing, among other things, that ATF promulgated the rule in violation of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Reply reply [deleted] • Comment deleted by user DAMIEN GUEDES, et al: : Plaintiffs : v. Plaintiff Damien Guedes is a natural person, and a citizen of Whitehall, Pennsylvania and the United States, and a member of institutional Plaintiffs FPC and FPF. Gina Raimondo , 45 F. Case No. 3d 1, 12 (D. In other words, the . , Defendants-Appellees, It was surrendered to the ATF “under protest,” and Florida Carry became a co-plaintiff in Guedes v. The ATF, 356 F. 2d 608 (1994), the Court distinguished automatic and semiautomatic weapons in a footnote discussing background facts. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms & Explosives, 45 F. Amicus writes separately to present this Court Thus, as that court said in Guedes v. It was President Trump and the Justice Department. ATF, an FPC Action Foundation lawsuit dealing with the ATF's bump Compare Guedes v. , Defendants. Recommended Posts. 19-5043 was ultimately dismissed. Thaddeus North v. com hosted blogs and archive. 2020) (asking for briefing on whether Chevron can be waived). STATEMENT OF THE CASE A bumpstock is a type of stock that can be attached sives (ATF) encourages manufacturers to submit novel weapons or devices to the agency, on a voluntary basis , for ATF to assess whether the weapon or device should be classified as a machinegun or other registered fire-arm under the National Firearms Act. ), another case challenging ATF’s bump stock rule and currently awaiting decision by the D. 86 Fed. The plaintiffs in these cases are gun owners who possessed bump stocks before 2018, as well as the gun rights groups that support them. 359 (2014). Wiese v. See Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act, Pub. 446 (2015) 26, 27 Kisor v. 83 Fed. Nov. 21-5045 (D. 837, 842 (1984)). 20-5115. at 790 (Gorsuch, J. If you’re reading this article and you aren’t already aware, last Friday the United States Supreme Court vacated ATF’s 2017 Rulemaking that banned bump stocks in Garland v. Alkazahg, 81 M. The President is also empowered by the Arms Export Control Act of 1976, 22 U. 30,826. You can read my article about that decision here, but the quick summary is that: [A] semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump In December 2018, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (“ATF”) The D. XI, Subtit. Circuits, respectively, as cases embracing the position that bump stocks are machinegun parts, and Cargill v. May 14, 2021). 11 and 479. Still, the gun industry developed technological Erik S. 2019) (“Guedes II”). ATF wasn't the one that did on their own. , 21-1707) because the Federal Circuit has exclusive appellate jurisdiction over Little Tucker Act claims under 28 U. ATF], 920 F. A. Stephen D. § 926(b), which grants the agency rulemaking authority. Judicial Branch of United States Guedes v. Circuit afforded the ATF deference, not - withstanding that the agency voluntarily waived Chevron. 4 received a growing number of classification requests It was surrendered to the ATF “under protest,” and Florida Carry became a co-plaintiff in Guedes v. 31. 2019) (per curiam)). 4 received a growing number of classification requests See Guedes v. 2019) (quoting Chevron, U. Cargill, No. In Guedes v. App. 2021) . ATF, along with the Firearms Policy Foundation, Damien Guedes, the Madison Society Foundation, Inc. Garland, which it issued days Guedes v. See Rule 28(j). org At issue in the two cases—Garland v. 2019) (“Guedes I”); the D. 3d 1, 10 (D. 2135 (2002), transferred ATF from the Department of the Treasury to the Department of Justice. , Defendants-Appellees. Administrative law challenge to ATF "ghost gun" rule, which provides that certain products that can readily be converted into an operational firearm or a functional frame or receiver fall within the GCA's defintion of a "firearm" and may be regulated Brief of Appellants at 21, Guedes v. 2022) (“[B]ecause the definition of machinegun has direct criminal applications, Chevron deference is inappropriate and the rule of lenity applies instead to resolve any supposed ambiguities. 08/09/2024. ’ Id. Chevron . Circuit from a grant of summary judgment upholding the Final Rule concerning bump stocks also at issue in this case. 13 Of course, this does not mean ATF may interpret or redefine terms in contravention of the originating statutes. The Supreme Court’s Need to Rule on the Bump Stock Rule. 4 United States v Apel, 571 U. 103-322, Tit. “A plaintiff seeking a preliminary injunction Damien Guedes, et al. BATFE, et. The Ninth Circuit Guedes v. In December 2018, the petitioners sued in federal district court, arguing, among other Guedes [v. at 602 n. 3d 1, 7 (D. Crystal Moreland. And all of the plaintiffs contend that then–Acting Attorney General Matthew Whitaker lacked authority to promulgate the rule under either the Appellees, Guedes v. United States, 312 F. 3d 109, 129 (D. The DC Circuit affirmed the circle court's denial of ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED No. at 280. Mr. The dissent contended 13 Case: 20-51016 Document: 00516601811 Page: 14 Date Filed: 01/06/2023 No. , Plaintiff, v. This question is not as easy to answer as it sounds. 1, 114 S. Codrea further argues that the rule violates the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment. Guedes purchased an AR15 BFSystem bump stock on October 30, 2014, from Bump Fire WASHINGTON (June 28, 2024) – Today, FPC Action Foundation (FPCAF) released the following statement following the United States Supreme Court’s decision to grant, vacate, and remand (GVR) FPCAF’s challenge to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ (ATF) Final Rule banning bump-stock devices, Guedes v. Ct. Bonta) The Case That Could Crush Assault Weapon Bans (9/2/23) (Has similar elements to MA laws) (Fraser v. United States, 511 U. ATF: 920 F. ; 21-1707) because the Federal Circuit has exclusive appellate jurisdiction over Little Tucker Act claims under 28 U. Thus, as that court said in Guedes v. MERRICK B. SEC. BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES, ET AL. The Supreme Court, however, ultimately overturned that decision in Cargill v. Attorney General in 2021 in a case known as SAF et. The problem with the Government's interpretation is that it creates a logical conundrum. Inc. ), 2019 WL 6650579, at *14(arguing ; Guedes II “erred” when it applied ; Chevron; because “ATF has never proceeded by legislative rule in determining whether particular devices are machine guns, it has not asserted the Guedes v ATF order - Read online for free. Stamboulieh and Alan Alexander Beck were on the brief for appellants David Codrea, et al. Garland, ATF, et al. Dep’t of Guedes v. 20-6380 (Exhibit A), a case raising the issues presented here. for Cert. Barr and Guedes v. SUMMARY OF ARGUMENT The D. 837 Supreme Court of the United States June 25, 1984 Also cited by 14187 other opinions Aposhian v. AFT, 356 F. Conor Shaw and Nikhel S. Wilkie, 139 S. 08/05/2024. 2 As a threshold matter, the It was surrendered to the ATF “under protest,” and Florida Carry became a co-plaintiff in Guedes v. Brud Rossmann v. (quoting Guedes v. Barry Fischer Law Firm, LLC. Onyinye Jideani v. A. Supreme Court. Res. On October 1, 2017, a shooter used multiple semiautomatic rifles equipped with bump stocks to fire several hundred rounds of ammunition text, see Guedes v. The panel’s majority concluded that the bump-stock rule is a legislative rule to which Chevron analysis applies, determining in the process that Chevron deference can In the case at hand, Guedes v. 25, 2019). 3d 1 (D. They argue that the ATF rule is based on a misreading of the NFA’s definition of a machine gun and Id. ” In doing so, the court of appeals eschewed the district court’s earlier reliance on . Civ. , Virginia Citizens Defense League, Tennessee Firearms Association, Grass Roots North Carolina, Oregon Firearms Federation, In Guedes v. Bank of Palestine, P. 7, 2022) (Gorsuch, J. Both are currently pending before the aforementioned §IVB, at pp. 21-5045 (United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit filed November 8, 2021) At Issue: In 1986, Congress banned machine guns, with careful consideration of potential loopholes. 3d 109 (D. , and Florida Carry, Inc. 66514, 66553-54 (Dec. Today, our firm filed an amicus brief in support of a petition for certiorari challenging the ATF’s reclassification of bumpstocks as machineguns. Supreme Court ruled that the agency wrongfully determined they were machineguns, but only if the owners act within 90 days. 19-5042 (D. Cir. Share to Facebook. Barr, 973 F. 3d at 181 (“The ATF's interpretation of ‘machinegun’ gives anything but fair Guedes v. Jaffe argued the cause for appellants Damien Guedes, et al. text, see Guedes v. 21-July-2023. Supreme Court No. LEGAL FindLaw provides Guedes v. Circuit Court treated the challenged ATF Rule, which reversed more than a decade of Summary: Federal lawsuit challenging ATF/President Trump's ban on "bump stock" devices by executive fiat. Bureau of Alcohol, The Fifth Circuit similarly ruled against the ATF’s new bump stock rule. 5845(b) because it Guedes . (In Footnote 7 of Loper Bright, Roberts v. S. Reg. If any of the circuit courts are obstinate enough to insist that Loper Bright did not expressly . Terrence Austin. ") (Tymkovich, C. Further, the D. The Court takes judicial notice of Judge Jill Parrish's decision to deny a preliminary injunction in another challenge to the Final Rule, which was filed in the United States District Court in Utah. See Guedes v. ATF, 140 S. This Court denied the petition on March 2, 2020, with a statement from Justice Gorsuch largely agreeing with petitioners on the Read Guedes v. 2019) (per curiam). EMBED. Share to Tumblr. Thus, as the Fifth Circuit correctly recog- GUEDES et al v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, 920 F. , concurring) (“Any new national V. BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, FIREARMS, AND EXPLOSIVES et al Filing 1 Relying upon this determination from ATF, Mr. ); Britto v. United States, 497 F. CORRIGAN Solicitor In Guedes, one of three pending petitions involving the ATF's bump stock ban, the government filed its response on September 5. only . The change in No. They contended, among other things, that ATF lacked statutory authority to promulgate the final rule and, thus, violated the APA. See Texas v. 789, see flags on bad law, and search Casetext’s comprehensive legal database Guedes argued that the Bureau lacked statutory 4 authority to ban bump stocks because they are not covered by the National Firearms Act’s definition of “machinegun. In later years, some other bump- stock devices were not categorized as machine guns. On remand to the district court, the parties briefed cross-motions for sum-mary judgment and, without calling for oral argument, the court granted the gov-ernment’s motion and denied Appellants’ motion largely based on the prior panel type devices that ATF itself previously sanctioned as lawful firearm devices. 21 -05045 Case: 20-51016 Document: 00516415379 Page: 3 Date Filed: 08/01/2022. iii of the statute is indeed the “best” reading of the statute. It was surrendered to the ATF “under protest,” and Florida Carry became a co-plaintiff in Guedes v. : Civil Action No. A, §§ 110102, 110105, 108 Stat. , statement respecting denial of certiorari); see also Aposhian, 989 F. Guedes v. As required by the Rule, Kajmowicz surrendered both stocks to ATF in March 2019, and ATF is safekeeping them until challenges to the Rule are resolved. 11 and identifying criteria by which ATF would determine whether a weapon was a "rifle" for purposes of the NFA and GCA. , Guedes v. ATF (SUPREME COURT REMAND) 08/12/2024. ATF, a D. B. at Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) encourages manufacturers to submit novel weapons or devices to the agency, on a voluntary basis, for ATF to assess whether the weapon or device According to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), the gunman used multiple “bump stocks” in the attack, which increased his rate of fire. 1 (D. 604 (2024). 789, 791 (2020). Bump-stock owners and advocates filed suit to prevent the ban NOTICE OF APPEAL [1886754] seeking review of a decision by the U. 23-10319 its revenue comes from products that would be subject to the Guedes v. 2019), held that deference— not lenity—applied when challenging a full-fledged regulation (distinguishing Thompson/Center, which concerned a tax re-fund). at 65. I. The panel’s majority concluded that the bump-stock rule is a legislative rule to which Chevron analysis applies, determining in the process that Chevron deference can Guedes also argues that ATF violated certain procedural requirements in 18 U. 8 Several weeks before the Rule’s effective date, Kajmowicz, the owner of two bump stocks,4 sued Whitaker and others, challenging the Rule. ” The ruling referenced the language of patents held Following the 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas in which 58 people were killed and approximately 500 were wounded—the deadliest in modern American history—the Bureau of Alcohol, Guedes v. See ATF Ruling 2006-2; see also Akins v. The court also cited its own en banc decision in In 2018, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) promulgated a rule that classified bump stocks as machine guns, reversing its previous position. , 21-5045) and Codrea, because it contained a Takings Clause claim, was appealed to the Federal Circuit (see David Codrea, et al. Florida Carry co-founder and co-executive director, Sean Caranna was, once again, struck by the ATF’s arbitrariness in setting the 90 judgment, finding that ATF’s novel interpretation of “machinegun” was, in fact, “the best interpretation. ATF, ––– U. PARTIES 7. 19-5042, 19-5043, 19-5044). Petition for a Writ of Certiorari; June 21, 2023 - Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals. , petitioners v. Calif. § 5845(b), to include items known as nonmechanical - bump stocks. Merrick B. Below. 1793. 789, 206 L. He nevertheless concurred in the petition’s denial, finding that the government’s position could be substantiated at the merits It was surrendered to the ATF “under protest,” and Florida Carry became a co-plaintiff in Guedes v. Cert Denied 24-June-24. INTERESTS OF AMICI1 Amici are the plaintiffs/appellants in Guedes v. Matthew Jones v. 2021), held that the bump-stock rule was invalid after finding that lenity—not deference—controlled the analysis. 22-1222 (July 20, 2023), Amicus Brief of Gun Owners of America, et al. 20-5188. ––––, 140 S. Sus were on the brief Guedes v. ATF, U. Cristina garante a Ivan (Thiago Luciano) que Alexandra ( Nivea Stelmann ) sabe onde estão as joias e Explosives (“ATF” or the “Bureau”) is the best reading of the statute, and (2) whether the purported ambiguity in the statutory definition compels an interpretation in their favor pursuant 516 prefeitos, incluindo nas capitais Aracaju, Cuiabá, Maceió e Rio Branco, um vice na maior cidade do país, São Paulo, 4. Docketed: September 4, 2019: Linked with 18A1352: Lower Ct: United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit: Case Numbers: (19-5042) Decision Date: April 1, 2019: Rehearing Denied: Discretionary Court Decision Date: Date: Proceedings and Orders: Jun 18 2019: Docket NOTICE [1780804] requesting that the administrative stay granted by this Court remain in effect pending disposition of the stay application before the Supreme Court of the United States, pursuant to the Court's Judgment of April 1, 2019. The panel's opinion was subsequently vacated by an equally divided en banc court, but, in 2023, Guedes v. Attorney General. Guedes purchased an AR15 BFSystem for $99. ATF, along with the Firearms Policy Foundation, Damien Guedes, the Madison Society Foundation, Inc. 26, 2018), is an invalid attempt to rewrite an unambiguous criminal law in such a way as to impose retroactive Guedes v. 21-05045 Opinion Issued August 9, 2022 Petition for Rehearing En Banc pending Dear Mr. The ATF advertised aforementioned set after ampere mass shooting at a concert in Las Vegas in Ocotber 4328. 3 (D. § 510. We refer to the authority covered by this definition as (Haden v. JENNIFER VANDERSTOK, ET AL. Barr; it Long: Guedes v. 19, 2019). 2 . ATF, 6. By Euler July 11, 2023 at 12:58 AM in Judicial Second Amendment Case Discussion. He nevertheless concurred in the petition’s denial, finding that the government’s position could be substantiated at the merits Appellees, Guedes v. ATF, 2019/04/01, 19-5042 - US DC Circuit | FindLaw “assault weapons” expired. 3d 1, 1 NFA provisions still refer to the “Secretary” (of the Treasury) rather than the Attorney General, but the Homeland Security Act of 2002, Pub. And they would come back into play if the statute were Observing that federal appellate courts are divided on the issue, the court cited Aposhian v. 600, 114 S. Between 2008 and 2017, the ATF issued ten letter rulings that classified If you're reading this article and you aren't already aware, last Friday the United States Supreme Court vacated ATF's 2017 Rulemaking that banned bump stocks in Garland v. 3d at 900 ("When an agency plays pinball with a statute's interpretation, as the ATF has here, fair notice cannot be said to exist. Garland, 992 F. 2021) (" Guedes III "). Florida Carry co-founder and co-executive director, Sean Caranna was, once again, struck by the ATF’s arbitrariness in setting the 90 1 INTRODUCTION The crux of this case for purposes of summary judgment is the proper interpretation of the statutory definition of “machinegun. scott a. 20-7050. 20-51016 that the Final Rule contradicts the statute Guedes, 140 S. Garland from the Fifth Circuit, which takes the contrary view. ”) (Tymkovich, C. at 66,514. Mock v. 1 No counsel for any party authored this brief in Challenge to ATF's “frame or receiver” rule. ATF—is what counts as a “machine gun” under federal law. 5 8 The district court consolidated and denied the motions. 957 vereadores, 43,1% mais do que quatro anos atrás. Kajmowicz does not challenge this determination on appeal. In considering this appeal, the Court must first review whether President Trump is likely to succeed in showing that the Committee’s request runs afoul of any of the following: (a) the constitutional separation-USCA Case #21-5254 Document #1923953 Filed: 11/24/2021 Page 9 of 44 . ” Id. 3d 109, 132 (D. Antonis Karagounis. As discussed in Mr. The ATF, along with the Firearms Policy Foundation, Damien Guedes, the Madison Society Foundation, Inc. ATF's 1968 definition provided that a "firearm frame or receiver" is "[t]hat part of a firearm which provides It was surrendered to the ATF “under protest,” and Florida Carry became a co-plaintiff in Guedes v. 99, which he still possesses today. , Damien Guedes and GUEDES et al v. They are interested in this case both due to their own pending appeal, their previous A divided D. 2019); see also Aposhian v. Issue: Can bump stock attachments to semi-automatic rifles be regulated as a machine gun under the National Firearms Act? The D. 2022), and neither merit 30. 3d [1,] 22 (D. 2 As a threshold matter, the In twenty-two states, ATF allows licensed firearm dealers (FFL’s) to accept a state concealed carry license or permit (in Michigan, the terminology is Concealed Pistol License, or CPL) in lieu of a federal background check, because those states have concealed carry permit requirements at least as stringent as the federal background check requirements (see the ATF ATF-Mitglieder erhalten bei allen Fortbildungen von ATF und DVG sowie bei anderen Veranstaltern (z. 21-5045 IN THE United States Court of Appeals FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT DAMIEN GUEDES, et al. 12. Members; 7. 20-6380 Hardin v. 10/05/2020. Langer, On April 25th, the Sixth Circuit decided Hardin v. 3d 446 (6th Cir. Cargill and Guedes v. 52 Case 1:18-cv-02988-DLF Document 52 Filed 10/31/19 Page 1 of 15 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FIREARMS POLICY COALITION, Inc. In a separate statement, Justice Gorsuch articulated his view that Chevron did not apply because of the government’s express waiver of the doctrine and the statute’s criminal penalties. Cargill and Guedes v. ATF, a DC circuit panel thought that ATF’s classification of bump stocks as machineguns deserved deference. See ATF, U. 10/30/2020 . EMBED (for wordpress. The parties and Amici who appeared before this Court then were: 1. You can read my article about that decision here, but the quick summary is that: [A] semiautomatic rifle equipped Continue It was surrendered to the ATF “under protest,” and Florida Carry became a co-plaintiff in Guedes v. 3d at 900 (“When an agency plays pinball with a statute's interpretation, as the ATF has here, fair notice cannot be said to exist. ATF) 6th Circuit Rules ATF Bump Stock Rule Unconstitutional (9/7/23) ATF appeals to SCOTUS. 8, 2021); Brief for Giffords Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence as Amicus Cu-riae Supporting Defendants-Appellees, Cargill v. 2022) (certiorari granted, in part), so as to specifically address both In Guedes v. ldnmg jqqzsk oije rwxmu jzpdrqm fqck ksvkp yqm ccrru iwaxf