[House Report 117-624]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
117th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
2d Session } { 117-624
======================================================================
RESOLUTION CALLING FOR THE SUBMISSION TO THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
OF CERTAIN INFORMATION REGARDING THE DECISION OF THE PRESIDENT OF THE
UNITED STATES TO INSTITUTE THE ``GHOST GUN'' RULE
_______
December 13, 2022.--Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be
printed
_______
Mr. Nadler, from the Committee on the Judiciary, submitted the
following
R E P O R T
together with
MINORITY VIEWS
[To accompany H. Res. 1478]
The Committee on the Judiciary, to whom was referred the
resolution (H. Res. 1478) calling for the submission to the
House of Representatives of certain information regarding the
decision of the President of the United States to institute the
``Ghost Gun'' Rule, having considered the same, reports
unfavorably thereon with an amendment and recommends that the
resolution not be agreed to.
The amendments are as follows:
CONTENTS
Page
Purpose and Summary.............................................. 2
Background and Need for the Legislation.......................... 2
Hearings......................................................... 3
Committee Consideration.......................................... 4
Committee Votes.................................................. 4
Committee Oversight Findings..................................... 4
Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects.......................... 4
New Budget Authority and Congressional Budget Office Cost
Estimate....................................................... 4
Duplication of Federal Programs.................................. 4
Performance Goals and Objectives................................. 4
Advisory on Earmarks............................................. 4
Section-by-Section Analysis...................................... 5
Minority Views................................................... 5
Strike all after the resolving clause and insert the
following:
That President Biden is requested to furnish to the House of
Representatives not later than 14 days after the adoption of this
resolution, in a complete and unredacted form, a copy of any documents,
records, reports, memos, correspondence, or other communication either
generated or received by the office of President Biden that refers to,
or relates to the decision of, or the reasoning used by, President
Biden to institute ATF final rule 2021R-05F, entitled ``Definition of
`Frame or Receiver' and Identification of Firearms'', published at 87
Fed. Reg. 24652 (April 26, 2022), also known as the ``Ghost Gun'' Rule.
Amend the preamble to read as follows:
Calling for the submission to the House of Representatives of certain
information regarding the decision of President Biden to institute the
``Ghost Gun''Rule.
Purpose and Summary
H. Res. 1478 is a non-binding resolution of inquiry that
requests President Biden provide to the House of
Representatives documents relating to the decision of the
President to institute Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and
Explosives (ATF) final rule 2021R-05F, entitled ``Definition of
`Frame or Receiver' and Identification of Firearms,'' known as
the ``Ghost Gun'' Rule, published at 87 Fed. Reg. 24652 (April
26, 2022). Representative Andrew Clyde (R-GA) introduced the
resolution on November 16, 2022. It currently has no co-
sponsors.
Background and Need for the Legislation
I. BACKGROUND ON RESOLUTIONS OF INQUIRY
Under the rules and precedents of the House, a resolution
of inquiry is used to obtain information from the executive
branch. A resolution of inquiry is directed to the President of
the United States or the head of a Cabinet-level agency,
requesting facts within the control of the executive branch.\1\
As a ``simple resolution,'' designated by ``H. Res.,'' a
resolution of inquiry does not carry the force of law.
``Compliance by the executive branch with the House's request
is voluntary, resting largely on a sense of comity between co-
equal branches of government and a recognition of the necessity
for Congress to be well-informed as it legislates.''\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Christopher M. Davis, Resolutions of Inquiry: An Analysis of
Their Use in the House, 1947-2011, Cong. Res. Serv. R40879 (May 15,
2012).
\2\Id. at 2.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
House Rules afford resolutions of inquiry a privileged
parliamentary status. A Member files a resolution of inquiry
like any other legislation. The resolution is then referred to
the proper committee of jurisdiction and the committee may: (1)
report the resolution either favorably or unfavorably; or (2)
choose not to report the resolution. If the committee does not
report the resolution to the House within 14 legislative days
of its introduction, however, a motion to discharge the
resolution from committee can be made on the House floor.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\House rule XIII, clause 7.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
II. NEED FOR THE LEGISLATION
This resolution requests that President Biden furnish to
the House of Representatives, not later than 14 days after the
adoption of the resolution, in a complete and unredacted form,
a copy of any documents, records, reports, memos,
correspondence, or other communication either generated or
received by the office of President Biden that refers to, or
relates to the decision of, or the reasoning used by President
Biden to institute ATF final rule 2021R-05F, entitled
``Definition of `Frame or Receiver' and Identification of
Firearms'', published at 87 Fed. Reg. 24652 (April 26, 2022),
also known as the ``Ghost Gun'' Rule.
Ghost guns are firearms constructed with component parts
that can be obtained anonymously, without a background check,
and which lack serial numbers. Most ghost guns are assembled
from parts or ``kits.'' These kits, available at in-person
stores and online, contain all the parts needed to assemble a
firearm, including unfinished receivers, tools, and step-by-
step instructions. The kits are widely available and can be
purchased by anyone, including prohibited purchasers, dangerous
extremists, domestic abusers, and gun traffickers--without a
background check. Since ghost guns are devoid of serial numbers
and other identifying marks, they are not traceable by law
enforcement, making them the perfect weapon for would-be
criminals. They have even made their way onto school campuses.
Ghost guns have been linked nationwide to homicides,
suicides, mass shootings, robberies, shooting deaths of law
enforcement officers, and domestic violence. From January 2016
through December 2021, the ATF received reports of more than
45,000 ghost guns recovered from crime scenes, including nearly
700 from homicide investigations. Without the ability to trace
these guns, some crimes go unsolved and the people who
committed them may harm our communities again. These firearms
are the fastest-growing gun safety problem facing communities
across the country.
Ghost guns were completely unregulated until May 2021, when
the ATF announced that it would seek to update firearms
regulations to address the proliferation of ghost guns. On
April 11, 2022, Attorney General Merrick Garland signed the
final rule. The rule mandates serialization and background
checks for certain gun kits and requires the serialization of
some existing ghost guns.
Ranking Member Jim Jordan (R-OH) sent a letter to the ATF
on November 3, 2022, just over a month ago, seeking various
information from the ATF. In part, this letter follows up on a
letter sent by Representative Andy Biggs (R-AZ) in August
2021--well over a year ago--which requested information about
the ATF's proposed ghost gun rule after it was announced, but
well before it was finalized. Ranking Member Jordan's recent
letter acknowledges that the ATF responded to the 2021 letter,
but now states--sixteen months after that first inquiry--that
the response was insufficient. The November 3, 2022 letter
notes that Ranking Member Jordan intends to follow-up in the
118th Congress.
Given Ranking Member Jordan's recent contact with the ATF
about this issue, after his colleague's earlier request for
information sixteen months ago and timely response, the ATF
should be given time to respond to his revived inquiry, and
indeed they have already committed to providing a response. If
they do not respond, Ranking Member Jordan can follow up in the
118th Congress. In light of these facts, the resolution is
unnecessary and therefore the Committee reported the resolution
without recommendation.
Hearings
The Committee on the Judiciary held no hearings on H. Res.
1478.
Committee Consideration
On December 7, 2022, the Committee met in open session and
ordered the resolution, H. Res. 1478, reported without
recommendation with an amendment in the nature of a substitute,
by voice vote, a quorum being present.
Committee Votes
In compliance with clause 3(b) of House rule XIII, there
were no rollcall votes on the resolution.
Committee Oversight Findings
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of House rule XIII, the
Committee advises that the findings and recommendations of the
Committee, based on oversight activities under clause 2(b)(1)
of House rule X, are incorporated in the descriptive portions
of this report.
Committee Estimate of Budgetary Effects
Pursuant to clause 3(d)(1) of House rule XIII, the
Committee adopts as its own the cost estimate prepared by the
Director of the Congressional Budget Office pursuant to section
402 of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974.
New Budget Authority and Tax Expenditures
Neither clause 3(c)(2) of House rule XIII and section
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974, nor clause
(3)(c)(3) of House rule XIII and section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, are applicable because this
legislation does not provide new budgetary authority or incur
costs.
Duplication of Federal Programs
Pursuant to clause 3(c)(5) of House rule XIII, no provision
of H. Res. 1478 establishes or reauthorizes a program of the
federal government known to be duplicative of another federal
program.
Performance Goals and Objectives
The Committee states that pursuant to clause 3(c)(4) of
House rule XIII, H. Res. 1478 requests President Biden furnish
to the House of Representatives documents relating to the
decision of, or the reasoning used by President Biden to
institute ATF final rule 2021R-05F, entitled ``Definition of
`Frame or Receiver' and Identification of Firearms'', published
at 87 Fed. Reg. 24652 (April 26, 2022), also known as the
``Ghost Gun'' Rule.
Advisory on Earmarks
In accordance with clause 9 of House rule XXI, H. Res. 1478
does not contain any congressional earmarks, limited tax
benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in clause 9(e),
9(f), or 9(g) of rule XXI.
Section-by-Section Analysis
The following discussion describes the resolution as
reported by the Committee.
H. Res. 1478, a non-binding resolution of inquiry, requests
President Biden furnish to the House of Representatives, no
later than 14 days after the adoption of the resolution,
complete and unredacted copies of any documents, records,
reports, memos, correspondence, or other communication either
generated or received by the office of President Biden that
refers to, or relates to the decision of, or the reasoning used
by President Biden to institute ATF final rule 2021R-05F,
entitled ``Definition of `Frame or Receiver' and Identification
of Firearms'', published at 87 Fed. Reg. 24652 (April 26,
2022), also known as the ``Ghost Gun'' Rule.
Minority Views
H. Res. 1478 requests the President to provide the House of
Representatives with documents generated or received by the
President that refer to or relate to the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives's (ATF) final rule 2021R-05F,
entitled ``Definition of `Frame or Receiver' and Identification
of Firearms''.
On May 21, 2021, ATF published a notice in the Federal
Register for this rule.\1\ On August 24, 2022, the Department
of Justice announced that the rule went into effect.\2\ The
Department stated that ``the new rule modernizes the definition
of a firearm and makes clear that parts kits that are readily
convertible to functional weapons, or function as `frames' or
`receivers' of weapons, are subject to the same regulations as
traditional firearms.''\3\ The rule expanded the definitions of
several terms associated with firearms because the current
regulations allegedly failed to capture the full meaning of
those terms. The rule also imposed additional marking and
record-keeping requirements necessary to implement the new
definitions.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau, Definition of
``Frame or Receiver'' and Identification of Firearms, 86 Fed. Reg.
27,720 (May 21, 2021).
\2\Press Release, U.S. Dep't of Justice, Frame and Receiver Rule
Goes into Effect, https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/frame-and-receiver-
rule-goes-effect (Aug. 24, 2022).
\3\Id.
\4\Definition of ``Frame or Receiver'' and Identification of
Firearms, supra note 1 at 27,727.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATF's rule goes well beyond the authority granted to the
agency in any applicable federal statutes. The rule expands the
definition of ``frame or receiver'' to include any part of a
firearm that can house even one mechanism of the firing
process.\5\ ATF concedes that its ``new definition would more
broadly define the term `frame or receiver' than the current
definition.''\6\ Moreover, the rule expands the definition of a
firearm beyond the intent of Congress. The rule expands the
definition of a firearm to include ``a weapon parts kit that is
designed to or may readily be assembled, completed, converted,
or restored.''\7\ However, the Gun Control Act of 1968 (GCA)
clearly defines a ``firearm'' in statute as:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\Id.
\6\Id.
\7\Id. at 27,741 (emphasis added).
(A) any weapon (including a starter gun) which will
or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel
a projectile by the action of an explosive; (B) the
frame or receiver of any such weapon. . . .\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\18 U.S.C. Sec. 921(a)(3).
When passing the GCA, Congress did not include a ``weapon
parts kit[s]'' and ATF took it upon itself to include assembled
and completed in the rule where Congress explicitly left those
actions out of the governing statute. In fact, ATF unilaterally
inserted a new definition using language from the Federal
Firearms Act (FFA) of 1938,\9\ which Congress affirmatively
repealed when passing the GCA in 1968.\10\ ATF has resurrected
the FFA's language through its new regulatory definition of
``the frame or receiver'' so that a single weapon might be
comprised of multiple ``frames'' and ``receivers.''\11\ Any of
these ``parts'' in ATF's interpretation would be considered a
firearm so long as the Director decreed any ``specific part or
parts of a weapon is the frame or receiver.''\12\ By doing so,
ATF disregards its controlling statutory language in the GCA
and ignores Congress's clear legislative intent in repealing
the FFA.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\Pub. L. 75-785.
\10\Pub. L. 90-618.
\11\Definition of ``Frame or Receiver'' and Identification of
Firearms, supra note 1 at 27,722.
\12\Definition of ``Frame or Receiver'' and Identification of
Firearms, supra note 1 at 27,743.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Moreover, ATF's rule creates a new definition to regulate
privately made firearms without any statutory authorization
from Congress to do so. ATF erroneously asserts that the GCA
``required all firearms to be serialized,''\13\ and that to do
so, ATF must require federal firearms licensees to serialize
and record any privately made firearms they come across. This
new mandate will greatly expand the statutory requirement that
only ``manufacturers'' and ``importers'' must mark guns they
manufacture or import.\14\ To enforce the serialization
requirement, ATF seeks to create a new federal crime of
obliterating the serial number on a privately made firearm and
to establish a new category of ``dealer-gunsmith'' who must
serialize and record privately made firearms.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\See 18 U.S.C. Sec. 923(i); 27 C.F.R. Sec. 478.92(a)(1).
\14\Definition of ``Frame or Receiver'' and Identification of
Firearms, supra note 1 at 27,732.
\15\Definition of ``Frame or Receiver'' and Identification of
Firearms, supra note 1 at 27,731-32. (ATF claims in the body of the
proposed regulation that ``this proposed provision is necessary to
allow ATF to trace all firearms. . . .'')
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ATF's rule also requires federal firearm licensees (FFLs)
to retain firearm transaction records in perpetuity or until
they go out of business. The GCA requires FFLs to maintain
certain records and authorizes the ATF to inspect these FFL
records for the purpose of tracing firearms used in crimes.\16\
The ATF's new requirement is a stark turn from existing
regulations, which allow FFLs to destroy firearm transaction
records after 20 years.\17\ Firearms trace data published on
ATF's website show that the average time to crime is 7.01 years
from the point of purchasing a firearm.\18\ This data seems to
undermine any justification for the ATF's rule requiring
firearm records be kept in perpetuity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\18 U.S.C. Sec. 923(g)(1)(B).
\17\27 C.F.R. Sec. 478.129.
\18\Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau, Firearms
Trace Data, Time-to-Crime-Firearms Recovered and Traced in the United
States and Territories, https://www.atf.gov/resource-center/firearms-
trace-data-2020 (last visited Dec. 3, 2022).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On August 10, 2021, Committee Republicans wrote to then-ATF
Acting Director Marvin Richardson concerning ATF's proposed
rule to expand definitions of several terms associated with
firearms.\19\ On September 1, 2021, ATF responded with a half-
page letter, but the agency did not produce any of the
requested documents or information. Committee Republicans sent
follow-up letters on November 3, 2022, and on November 28,
2022, reiterating the outstanding requests and reminding ATF
that the Committee may be forced to resort to compulsory
process to obtain the requested materials if they are not
produced in a timely manner. Committee Republicans will
continue to press the Biden Administration for answers about
this rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\Letter from Andy Biggs et al, to Marvin Richardson, Acting
Director, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (Aug.
10, 2021).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jim Jordan,
Ranking Member.
[all]