by Bryce Shonka
A line was drawn in the sand last week – a response by the Federal Government to the State of Tennessee and their assertion of sovereignty under the Tenth Amendment to the US Constitution.
(Editor’s note: A similar response was sent to Montana Firearms licenses on 07-16-09 as well)
Part of a series of moves by states seeking to utilize the Tenth Amendment as a limit on Federal Power, the Tennessee State Senate approved Senate Bill 1610 (SB1610), the Tennesse Firearms Freedom Act, by a vote of 22-7. The House companion bill, HB1796 previously passed the House by a vote of 87-1.
Governor Breseden allowed the bill to become law without signing.
The law states that “federal laws and regulations do not apply to personal firearms, firearm accessories, or ammunition that is manufactured in Tennessee and remains in Tennessee. The limitation on federal law and regulation stated in this bill applies to a firearm, a firearm accessory, or ammunition that is manufactured using basic materials and that can be manufactured without the inclusion of any significant parts imported into this state.â€
At the time of passage through the TN House and Senate, Judiciary Chairman Mae Beavers had this to say-
“Be it the federal government mandating changes in order for states to receive federal funds or the federal government telling us how to regulate commerce contained completely within this state – enough is enough. Our founders fought too hard to ensure states’ sovereignty and I am sick and tired of activist federal officials and judges sticking their noses where they don’t belong.â€
The Federal Government, by way of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms expressed its own view of the Tenth Amendment this week when it issued an open letter to ‘all Tennessee Federal Firearms Licensees’ in which it denounced the opinion of Beavers and the Tennessee legislature. ATF assistant director Carson W. Carroll wrote that ‘Federal law supersedes the Act’, and thus the ATF considers it meaningless.
Constitutional historian Kevin R.C. Gutzman sees this as something far removed from the founders’ vision of constitutional government:
“The letter says, in part, ‘because the Act conflicts with Federal firearms laws and regulations, Federal law supersedes the Act, and all provisions of the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act, and their corresponding regulations, continue to apply.’ That is precisely what I predicted the Federal Government’s response to the Tennessee act would be. As I told Judge Andrew Napolitano on Fox News’s Glenn Beck Program on June 5, 2009, federal officials don’t care about a good historical argument concerning the meaning of the Constitution.”
“Their view is that the states exist for the administrative convenience of the Federal Government, and so of course any conflict between state and federal policy must be resolved in favor of the latter.”
“This is another way of saying that the Tenth Amendment is not binding on the Federal Government. Of course, that amounts to saying that federal officials have decided to ignore the Constitution when it doesn’t suit them.â€
The Federal Government has regularly claimed that the commerce clause of the constitution, which gives DC authority to regulate commerce between the states, gives them authority to regulate or add prohibitions on items that never cross state lines.
One notable use of the commerce clause in this manner can be found in the 2005 decision by the Supreme Court in ‘Gonzales vs. Raich’, where the court contended that consuming one’s locally grown marijuana for medical purposes affects the interstate market of marijuana, and hence that the federal government may regulate—and prohibit—such consumption. They used this claim, even though at the same time they made it clear that no legal market for marijuana exists.
One key aspect of the ATF’s letter is that it was only sent out to existing Federal Firearms Licensees, those generally already in compliance with federal regulations – and who likely would not have participated in the TN Firearms Freedom act anyway, according to sources close to Tenth Amendment Center.
Ultimately what the letter represents is another move in the chess match being played out between the states and the Federal Government, the resolution of which may not be seen for quite some time.
Below is the full text of the letter sent last week by the ATF:
“U.S. Department of Justice
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,
Firearms and Explosives
Assistant Director
OPEN LETTER TO ALL TENNESSEE
FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEES
The purpose of this letter is to provide guidance on your obligations as a Federal firearms licensee (“FFL”). The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”) is dedicated to your success in meeting your requirements as a Federal firearms licensee. The following guidance is intended to assist you in accomplishing this goal.
The passage of the Tennessee Firearms Freedom Act, H.B. 1796, 106th Leg. (Tenn. 2009) 1796 (“Act”), effective June 19, 2009, has generated questions from industry members as to how this State law may affect them while engaged in a firearms business activity. The Act purports to exempt personal firearms, firearms accessories, and ammunition manufactured in the State, and which remain in the State, from most Federal firearms laws and regulations. However, because the Act conflicts with Federal firearms laws and regulations, Federal law supersedes the Act, and all provisions of the Gun Control Act and the National Firearms Act, and their corresponding regulations, continue to apply.
As you may know, Federal law requires a license to engage in the business of manufacturing firearms or ammunition, or to deal in firearms, even if the firearms or ammunition remain within the same state. All firearms manufactured by a licensee must be properly marked. Additionally, each licensee must record the type, model, caliber or gauge, and serial number of each firearm manufactured or otherwise acquired, and the date such manufacture or other acquisition was made. The information required must be recorded in the licensee’s records not later than the seventh day following the date such manufacture or other acquisition was made. Firearms transaction records and NICS background checks must be conducted prior to disposition of firearms to unlicensed persons. These, as well as other Federal requirements and prohibitions, apply whether or not the firearms or ammunition have crossed state lines.
If you have any questions regarding the Federal firearms laws and regulations, please contact your local ATF office. ATF works closely with the firearms industry and appreciates the important role the industry plays in combating violent crime. A listing of ATF office phone numbers can be found at http://www.atf.gov/contact/field.htm. Carson W. Carroll, Assistant Director (Enforcement Programs and Services)â€









[...] the ATF has responded: “The letter says, in part, ‘because the Act conflicts with Federal firearms laws and [...]
[...] LAW Asserts State Sovereignty The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution Posted on 18 July 2009 [...]
[...] The people must organize with local and state leaders in their individual states. According to the US Constitution, the Fed exists and serves at the pleasure of the people and their respective states. These principles either stand, or everything collapses. See Tenth Amendment action reports here – http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/07/18/the-battle-begins-atf-vs-the-constitution/ [...]
[...] Campaign For Liberty — ATF to TN: Firearms Freedom Law Is Invalid There are others too: The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution|Tenth Amendment Center Rebellion Blog I will get this in front of several radio show hosts tomorrow including Phil [...]
[...] week the ATF sent a letter to Tennessee firearm manufacturers that showed the federal government cares little for the [...]
[...] it doesn’t suit them.” Jump to Comments An article by Bryce Shonka posted at The Tenth Amendment Center website on the Federal Government (through the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms) attacking [...]
[...] [...]
[...] The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution Tenth Amendment Center. U.S. Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives Assistant Director OPEN LETTER TO ALL TENNESSEE FEDERAL FIREARMS LICENSEES [...]
[...] money is going to counties that voted for Obama than for McCain. But check this out. From The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution|Tenth Amendment Center [...]
[...] regarding recently-passed Firearms Freedom Act bills in a number of States. In another update, the TenthAmendmentCenter.com and TNGunOwners.com sites provide the reaction of the federal Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms to this [...]
[...] counterfeit muscles. Â Their “power” is born of willful disregard of the Constitution. A line was drawn in the sand last week – a response by the Federal Government to the State of Tennessee and their assertion of [...]
[...] The Battle Begins: ATF vs the 2nd Amendment by Bryce Shonka [...]
[...] is not alone as a state challenged by central authority in recent months. Recently, federal firearms licensees in Tennessee and Montana received a letter from another Federal agency, the ATF, who had also issued a decree wrought with hubris – claims by [...]
[...] The Battle Begins:The ATF vs. The Constitution – 10th Amendment Center 7/24/09 [...]
[...] Firearms Freedom Acts have already passed in both Montana and Tennessee, and have been introduced in a number of other states around the country. There’s been no lack of controversy surrounding them, either. The Tenth Amendment Center recently reported on the ATF’s position that such laws don’t matter: [...]
[...] Firearms Freedom Acts have already passed in both Montana and Tennessee, and have been introduced in a number of other states around the country. There’s been no lack of controversy surrounding them, either. The Tenth Amendment Center recently reported on the ATF’s position that such laws don’t matter: [...]
[...] Firearms Freedom Acts have already passed in both Montana and Tennessee, and have been introduced in a number of other states around the country. There’s been no lack of controversy surrounding them, either. The Tenth Amendment Center recently reported on the ATF’s position that such laws don’t matter: [...]
[...] Firearms Freedom Acts have already passed in both Montana and Tennessee, and have been introduced in a number of other states around the country. There’s been no lack of controversy surrounding them, either. The Tenth Amendment Center recently reported on the ATF’s position that such laws don’t matter: [...]
[...] the ATF chimed in with their views on such legislation, though advocates of firearms protections take a different [...]
[...] The Battle Begins: ATF vs the Constitution [...]
[...] http://www.tenthamendmentcenter.com/2009/07/18/the-battle-begins-atf-vs-the-constitution/ [...]
[...] is not alone as a state challenged by central authority in recent months. Recently, federal firearms licensees in Tennessee and Montana received a letter from another Federal agency, the ATF, who had also issued a decree wrought with hubris – [...]
[...] Tenth Amendment battle rages as Federal government takes big dump on state’s rights The regulation of intrastate commerce is vested in the states under amendments IX and X of the [...]
[...] far, the only response has been a sternly-written letter from the assistant director of the ATF stating his position that federal law supercedes state law – and the federal government [...]
[...] ATF sent a stern letter to all license holders in both states this year – stating their position that the state law [...]
[...] The ATF sent a stern letter to all license holders in both states this year – stating their position that the state law is invalid.   Yesterday, a report in the Memphis Commercial Appeal gives us a little more insight into the ATF’s position: [...]
[...] I posted before , ATF has now gone after a similar Tennessee firearms law and is disregarding the 10th Amendment: Part of a series of moves by states seeking to utilize the Tenth Amendment as a limit on Federal [...]
[...] There’s been no lack of controversy surrounding them, either. The Tenth Amendment Center recently reported on the ATF’s position that such laws don’t matter: The Federal Government, by way of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms expressed its own [...]
[...] There’s been no lack of controversy surrounding them, either. The Tenth Amendment Center recently reported on the ATF’s position that such laws don’t matter: The Federal Government, by way of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms expressed its own [...]
[...] in Montana to validate the principles and terms of the Act. The lawsuit was filed after federal officials claimed that both the Tennessee and Montana Firearms Freedom Acts were null and v…. (h/t Jeff [...]
[...] There’s been no lack of controversy surrounding these laws, either. The Tenth Amendment Center recently reported on the ATF’s position that such laws don’t matter: [...]
[...] There’s been no lack of controversy surrounding these laws, either. The Tenth Amendment Center recently reported on the ATF’s position that such laws don’t matter: [...]
[...] There’s been no lack of controversy surrounding these laws, either. The Tenth Amendment Center recently reported on the ATF’s position that such laws don’t matter: [...]
[...] ‘liberty ladies,’ they have tried to affirm our 2nd amendment states rights. But the BATF sent them a letter essentially stating that they were out their league and that they would tell them what the states [...]
[...] the rest, including the ATF’s letter to Tennessee’s Federal Firearms Licensees here. Share and [...]
[...] Firearms Freedom Acts have already passed in both Montana and Tennessee, and have been introduced in a number of other states around the country. There’s been no lack of controversy surrounding them, either. The Tenth Amendment Center recently reported on the ATF’s position that such laws don’t matter: [...]
[...] Tennessee and Montana tried this last year. But the feds basically said “No, you’re wrong.” The states said “Why?”, the feds said “BECAUSE WE SAY SO!”, and both states [...]
[...] like being challenged, and in the case of the ATF, will claim that the state law doesn’t mean anything. The same effectively holds true on the medical marijuana side of the coin as [...]
[...] I posted before , ATF has now gone after a similar Tennessee firearms law and is disregarding the 10th Amendment: Part of a series of moves by states seeking to utilize the Tenth Amendment as a limit on Federal [...]
[...] been no lack of controversy surrounding these laws, either. The Tenth Amendment Center previously reported on the ATF’s position that such laws don’t matter: The Federal Government, by way of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms expressed its own [...]
[...] been no lack of controversy surrounding these laws, either. The Tenth Amendment Center previously reported on the ATF’s position that such laws don’t matter: The Federal Government, by way of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms expressed its own [...]
[...] Another letter was sent in 2009 to both Montana and Tennessee in response to those states passing a Firearms Freedom Act. Rather than an explicit threat of any sort, these letters completely dismissed any constitutional standing or legitimate concern by the states, instead (incorrectly) affirming the federal government’s supreme authority over the issue at hand. [...]
[...] its State Constitution to make English the official language of the State. Also in 2009, similar letters were sent to both Montana and Tennessee threatening over their Firearms Freedom acts. Last month, [...]
[...] its State Constitution to make English the official language of the State. Also in 2009, similar letters were sent to both Montana and Tennessee threatening over their Firearms Freedom acts. Last month, [...]