BUTLER COUNTY, IOWA – U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) is calling on President Joe Biden to withdraw a stringent new rule requiring more Americans to register for federal firearms licenses (FFL). Grassley cited the policy as the latest example of Biden’s executive branch skirting the legislative process, skewing its application of bipartisan laws and dismissing the will of the elected Congress.
“The bipartisan process ensures equal representation for the entire country, including the half that does not identify as Democrats. We all benefit from the tenets of bipartisanship. You and your administration must honor them and allow the legislative process to play out,” Grassley wrote.
“Sweeping gun regulations have failed to pass Congress, reflecting divided national opinions on the issue. The debate belongs to the people through their representatives in Congress. You need to respect their constitutional rights and withdraw your proposed rule,” he concluded.
Grassley’s letter was prompted by a recent proposal by Attorney General Merrick Garland and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to expand the definition of “engaged in the business” as a firearms dealer. If finalized, the rule could subject any law-abiding citizen who sells a gun online to federal compliance inspections, fees and warrantless home searches. The move undermines the intent of a bipartisan law enacted last year.
The Biden administration’s overreach has risen to unconstitutional levels on multiple occasions, leaving it to the judicial system to set the record straight. In June, the Supreme Court struck down the president’s student loan debt transfer plan because it lacked legislative authorization. In May, it scrapped the Environmental Protection Agency’s definition of Waters of the United States, as it unlawfully broadened the scope of the Clean Water Act.
Grassley’s full letter to President Biden follows:
September 14, 2023
Dear President Biden:
I continue to be concerned about your administration’s executive overreach and its impact on bipartisan efforts. Your administration’s proposed rule expanding the scope of individuals who must apply for a Federal Firearms License (FFL) is just the latest example of the executive branch exceeding its authority. The role of the president is to enforce our laws, not write them. The power to legislate belongs to Congress, a body designed to capture the entire country's diverse views and interests, not just the preferences of the majority party. This legislative process is intentionally burdensome. Its hurdles are safeguards that protect the will of the people from the will of an individual. This process ensures laws are constitutional and benefit the nation as a whole.
Your attempts to discard the legislative process have risen to an unconstitutional level and forced court intervention. For example, in June 2023, the Supreme Court determined that your administration’s debt cancellation program lacked legislative authorization. The opinion quoted then-Speaker Pelosi’s unheeded warning, “People think that the President of the United States has the power for debt forgiveness. He does not.” If your administration had any confusion about limits of its authority, the Supreme Court reemphasized the line forbidding the executive branch from fundamentally changing legislative schemes.
I, and my Republican colleagues, cautioned your administration about the dangers of breaching this separation of powers.
In February, I told Attorney General Garland that his memorandum instructing prosecutors to disregard existing criminal laws breached trust and halted bipartisan negotiations aimed at changing the law. Instead of heeding my warning, AG Garland and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) doubled-down on executive overreach by unilaterally expanding the statutory definition of a rifle to include a brace designed so disabled persons could fire heavy pistols safely.
Even after the Fifth Circuit called the rule a “monumental error,” AG Garland and ATF proposed a new rule vastly expanding the number of individuals who must register for a Federal Firearms License (FFL). This new rule appears to capture any law-abiding citizen who sells a single firearm online and subjects them to qualification and compliance inspections by ATF Industry Operations Investigators. Suppose this individual transacts the sale from his home. As a potential ill-conceived consequence of the rule, certain areas of the individual’s home may now be subject to warrantless “inspections” for the duration of the individual’s FFL license. This produces a bizarre result in which law-abiding gun owners receive fewer constitutional protections than those enjoyed by fentanyl dealers distributing drugs from their homes. After all, the federal government must secure a search warrant before inspecting any area of the fentanyl dealer’s home. This result is at odds with a system of governance in which “every individual of the community at large has an equal right to the protection of government,” including the protection of the Constitution.
These efforts to circumvent the legislative process have stemmed from contrived readings of bipartisan legislation.
As a former senator, you are well aware bipartisan agreements require trust and the understanding that neither party will breathe unintended meaning into the resulting legislation. Your political experience has no doubt taught you that the only constant rule of governance is that power dynamics change. Those holding the majority one day can quickly find themselves governing from the minority the next. The bipartisan process ensures equal representation for the entire country, including the half that does not identify as Democrats.8 We all benefit from the tenets of bipartisanship. You and your administration must honor them and allow the legislative process to play out. Sweeping gun regulations have failed to pass Congress, reflecting divided national opinions on the issue. The debate belongs to the people through their representatives in Congress. You need to respect their constitutional rights and withdraw your proposed rule.
-30-