State of California, et al. v. ATF, et al.

A ghost gun is a gun specifically designed to evade these laws. Lacking serial numbers, these weapons are untraceable — hence their name. More importantly still, they can be sold without a background check, allowing individuals who are legally prohibited from owning firearms — due to criminal convictions, restraining orders, or age restrictions — to obtain them with ease.

Ghost guns are sold in partially incomplete form, and the sellers claim that the product is not yet a gun because it requires some additional work from the purchaser to become a functional firearm. The amount of work required varies, but ghost gun companies have strived to make it as simple, straightforward, and quick as possible. The work can be done with nothing more than commonly owned tools, like a drill or a file, and the tools are sometimes even included in a pre-packaged kit along with the gun parts. As a result, ghost guns have proliferated rapidly in the last decade.

While ghost guns lack serial numbers and aren’t subject to background checks, they are capable of firing bullets just the same. Ghost guns are, in effect, a lethal do-it-yourself project that allows anyone at home to build a fully operable firearm within minutes.

Consequently, ghost guns have become the weapon of choice for illegal gun traffickers, organized crime, mass shooters, and anyone who wants to use a gun for criminal activity and murder. In fact, ghost gun companies have intentionally and specifically crafted products that are just slightly unfinished enough to evade federal law, knowing their primary market is those who are not legally eligible to own guns.

Under the plain language of the GCA, ghost guns should already be treated as firearms. The GCA definition of a firearm is not limited to the traditional, ready-made version of the weapon that comes to mind when you think of a gun, but expressly provides that a “frame or receiver” — the core components of a gun — qualify as firearms, as do products that are “designed to or may readily be converted” into functional weapons. That’s precisely what ghost gun kits contain.

Despite this, the ATF has failed to consistently regulate ghost guns and their component kits like traditional firearms. This means they have left the door open for anyone to sidestep federal law to obtain access to a gun if they so sought. If they don’t want to undergo a background check or other key protections, all they have to do is buy a ghost gun kit instead. 

When GIFFORDS Law Center filed this lawsuit in 2020, we challenged the ATF’s policy of refusing to classify all ghost gun kits as firearms — including kits containing frames or receivers sold with assembly tools, as well as those offering just the core frame or receiver.

In 2022, during the course of this litigation, the Biden administration issued a much-needed Final Rule directing the ATF to treat ghost gun kits that include 80 percent frames and receivers, plus other essential firearm parts, as firearms under federal law. While this directive was a critical step toward addressing the rapid proliferation of ghost guns, the rule left a glaring loophole: the rule would not cover AR-15 receivers sold alone, so ghost gun sellers could simply split the same parts into separate transactions, bypassing serialization and background check requirements entirely. In fact, one seller — Juggernaut Tactical — went so far as to instruct its customers to individually purchase all the necessary parts to create a firearm from an 80 percent receiver or frame — an easy, blatant workaround of the rule’s intent. 

In response, we have since amended our complaint to close this loophole and ensure that federal agencies are held accountable for enforcing our nation’s gun laws to the fullest extent, whether the parts are sold in a single kit or piecemeal. By failing to properly regulate ghost guns as firearms under the GCA, the ATF and its leadership have allowed ghost gun companies to put profit over lives and deadly weapons into the hands of dangerous criminals. In the process, the agency has put the lives of the millions of Americans it’s entrusted to protect at risk.

80 percent receivers are pieces of metal forged for one purpose only: to be quickly and easily transformed into fully functional firearms. In fact, to the lay eye, 80 percent receivers are in all material respects indistinguishable from a ready-to-fire receiver.

It’s true: ghost gun manufacturers have gone to great lengths to make the conversion process as fast and foolproof as possible, selling jig kits, milling machines, and blueprint instructions alongside the unfinished receivers so that individuals can create a gun that fires in less than 15 minutes. But even without these products, anyone with internet access can easily find detailed instructions for completing their receiver with common household tools — or just buy these items directly from the manufacturer’s website in a separate transaction.

The ATF’s Final Rule is so narrow in scope and insufficient to curb the sale of ghost guns that sellers themselves have openly admitted it has “very little practical effect” and “will not stop anyone who really wants to make a gun from building their own.”

Thus, we bring this lawsuit to ensure that ATF fully and faithfully enforces the GCA, as written, and close the loopholes that allow ghost gun manufacturers to continue flooding our communities with untraceable, unregulated firearms.

The ATF has both the authority and the obligation to shut this loophole down. Instead, it has abdicated its responsibility, allowing unregulated gun kits and parts to flood the market unchecked. This lawsuit demands that the ATF do what the law — and public safety — requires: enforce existing rules and protect our communities from the growing threat of ghost guns.

Our lawsuit seeks the following forms of relief:

This case is about more than a single federal agency’s policy or even one statute’s interpretation — it’s about safeguarding the integrity of our nation’s commonsense gun laws. After all, what value do our laws hold if the very agencies charged with enforcing them refuse to act? Regulations mean nothing without enforcement, and without enforcement, communities across the country are left vulnerable to preventable gun violence.

The civil lawsuit against the ATF, California et al. v. ATF, et al., was filed on September 29, 2020, in the federal district court for the Northern District of California (Case No. 3:20-cv-06761). The plaintiffs included the State of California and Giffords, as well as Bryan Muehlberger and Frank Blackwell — two parents who lost children in the November 2019 tragedy at Saugus High School committed with a ghost gun. The Court subsequently dismissed the individual plaintiffs on procedural grounds.

The defendants named in the suit included the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF); Regina Lombardo, in her official capacity as Acting Deputy Director of ATF; Michael R. Curtis, in his official capacity as Chief of the Firearms Technology Industry Services Branch of ATF; the United States Department of Justice (DOJ); and William Barr, in his official capacity as Attorney General of the United States.

Following the District Court’s February 26, 2024, ruling on the parties’ cross motions for summary judgment, Defendants appealed the case to the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals.

Proceedings in the 9th Circuit were stayed pending the US Supreme Court’s decision in Garland v. VanDerStok (SCOTUS No. 23-852), and the stay was lifted following the Supreme Court’s March 26, 2024 decision.

For press inquiries or questions about this lawsuit, please email our press team at media@giffords.org.