The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) has settled lawsuits related to the classification of forced reset triggers (FRTs) as “machineguns.” The announcement, made on May 16, follows deliberations from the Attorney General’s 2nd Amendment Task Force and an executive order by President Trump titled Protecting Second Amendment Rights.
As part of the settlement, the government will return seized FRTs to Rare Breed, a key manufacturer involved in the litigation, and individuals who surrendered them amid allegations of illegal machinegun possession. However, certain terms may limit their market availability.
FRTs are aftermarket components that enable a faster firing rate in semi-automatic firearms without altering their fundamental mechanism. Despite this, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) reclassified FRTs as machineguns in 2021. This led to enforcement actions against manufacturers and owners.
Plaintiffs including Rare Breed and the National Association for Gun Rights challenged DOJ’s classification in court. In July 2024, a Texas federal judge vacated ATF’s classification of FRTs as unlawful. The Supreme Court also ruled that adding a bump stock does not create a machinegun.
The settlement resolves cases involving DOJ, Rare Breed, NAGR, and individual plaintiffs. It stipulates that FRTs operating as described by Texas courts are not considered machineguns unless designed for handguns.
Rare Breed agreed not to design or market FRTs for handguns and will promote safe use practices online. While they can continue manufacturing compliant products under patent protection, other companies might face entry barriers during this period.
The government retains discretion over returning FRTs involved in criminal investigations or subject to forfeiture laws. Affected individuals can request returns by September 30 through ATF’s website.
This agreement doesn’t alter the Texas court’s decision on ATF’s classification but provides remedies for those whose devices were seized or surrendered under threat of prosecution. Although it doesn’t guarantee success for non-party individuals seeking similar relief.
Overall, this settlement addresses civil disputes concerning FRTs while acknowledging law-abiding gun owners’ rights without posing inherent public safety threats.
