WA joins 15 states suing over deregulation of rapid-fire gun devices
This story was originally published on MyNorthwest.com.
Washington is joining a multi-state lawsuit targeting a specific type of gun trigger.
Washington Attorney General Nick Brown announced on Monday that he's joining 15 other attorneys general in suing the Trump Administration and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) over their plans to allow the sale of forced reset triggers.
'Communities are less safe with these mass-shooting devices in circulation,' Brown said in a statement. 'Essentially deregulating them is another example of this administration being driven by extreme ideology rather than commonsense.'
Forced reset triggers are devices that allow semi-automatic rifles to be fired more rapidly. The suit says returning the devices to market violates federal law, arguing they turn regular guns into machine guns.
The Department of Justice (DOJ) recently settled with the maker of the triggers, Rare Breed Triggers, resolving previous lawsuits brought by the Biden Administration.
The agreement states Rare Breed Tiggers 'will not develop or design FRTs for use in any handgun.' It also requires the ATF to return the triggers 'that it has seized or taken as a result of a voluntary surrender.'
'This Department of Justice believes that the 2nd Amendment is not a second-class right,' Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a statement. 'And we are glad to end a needless cycle of litigation with a settlement that will enhance public safety.'
The federal lawsuit announced on Monday was filed in the state of Maryland. Attorney General Brown is joining New Jersey, Delaware, Maryland, Colorado, Hawai'i, Illinois, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, and the District of Columbia.
Read more of Aaron Granillo's stories here.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
9 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Controversial Illinois ‘sanctuary' law at center of Pritzker's testimony in Washington
WASHINGTON, D.C. - As Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker prepares to testify before a Congressional committee on Thursday morning, he'll face questions about the state's TRUST Act. The controversial law limits the degree to which local police can cooperate with federal immigration enforcement. The backstory In 2017, Illinois enacted the TRUST Act under Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner. The law bans local police from complying with federal requests to detain or arrest a person in the country illegally, unless ordered by a judge. Local law enforcement also cannot stop, search, or arrest anyone based solely on their immigration or citizenship status. In 2021, the state legislature passed laws expanding protections for immigrants in Illinois. Mark Fleming of the National Immigrant Justice Center helped craft the bill and said the point is to keep immigration enforcement in the hands of federal agents. "State and local governments are making a decision not to participate in civil immigration enforcement," Fleming said. Fleming said that doesn't mean local law enforcement can't help out in some cases. "We're not allowed to ask where you're from. They made that part of the act," he said. The other side DuPage County Sheriff James Mendrick, who recently announced a run for governor as a Republican, said the Trust Act has forced police officers to choose between conflicting sets of state and federal laws. "They've got the cops scared to death," Mendrick said. "Cops are worried that if they take action, they're gonna get sued." Mendrick believes Illinois communities would be safer if police shared immigration status of criminal suspects right away, so ICE could apprehend them while in custody – as opposed to raiding homes, schools and businesses. But Fleming says the idea is to allow residents to come out of the shadows without fear of being deported by local police. "Every study that has looked at it has uniformly found that TRUST Act doesn't diminish community safety, and that in areas like domestic violence laws like the TRUST Act enhance community safety," Fleming said. But Mendrick says he believes the TRUST Act violates federal law and is calling for the Department of Justice to investigate. "You can't shield them from detection," Mendrick said. "Giving them housing and putting 44 million into housing, sounds like shielding to me, sounds like harboring, sounds like participating." Fleming says the courts have already spoken and ruled in favor of the state's implementation of the law. "Frankly, this issue has been litigated over and over first in the first Trump administration and now in the second Trump administration," he said.
Yahoo
44 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Man, 38, accused of spiking pregnant girlfriend's drink with abortion drug
A 38-year-old man is facing capital murder and tampering with evidence charges in connection with accusations he terminated his girlfriend's pregnancy without her consent or knowledge, investigators announced earlier this week. The alleged incident, according to a news release from the Parker County Sheriff's Department in Texas, an area about 35 miles west of Fort Worth, occurred in October 2024. An unidentified woman who was reportedly dating the suspect, identified as Justin Anthony Banta, a Texas resident and employee of the United States Department of Justice, told sheriff's investigators that she'd informed the 38-year-old that she was pregnant in September 2024. Banta, according to the woman, told her he would cover the cost of an abortion and suggested they order the abortion-inducing medication Plan C online. 'The victim informed Banta of her desire to keep the baby,' investigators said. On Oct. 17, 2024, at approximately six weeks pregnant, the woman received a sonogram from her doctor who reported a healthy pregnancy with strong vital signs and heartbeat. Later the same day, Banta met the woman at a coffee shop where the victim believes he 'added abortion-inducing pills to her drink without her knowledge or permission.' The following day, the victim reported exhaustion and bleeding so heavy that she went to the emergency room. On Oct. 19, according to sheriff's investigators, the woman lost the pregnancy. During an investigation, the 38-year-old's cellphone was confiscated as evidence. Sheriff's investigators believe that Banta, who works in the DOJ's IT department, remotely accessed the device and performed a reset, 'thereby deleting crucial evidence related to the case.' On June 6, authorities arrested Banta for tampering with physical evidence and a charge from the Texas Rangers for capital murder. The 38-year-old later posted $500,000 bail and was released. The federal IT worker, who is separated from his wife, NBC News reported, and his lawyer are denying the allegations, saying Banta only met the alleged victim four times. U.S. Marshal wrongly detained by ICE agents in lobby of federal building Michael Heiskell, Banta's attorney, told the outlet that his client has cooperated with investigators since last fall when his relationship with the woman ended and that, so far, law enforcement has shown Banta no evidence that the woman was in fact pregnant. 'There were discussions about her being pregnant, but that was never confirmed by her to him. And yes, he did research Plan C,' Heiskell told NBC News, while adding that his client did not put the drug into the woman's drink. The Parker County Sheriff's Department expressed its gratitude to the owners and staff of the coffee shop for their cooperation with the investigation, though they did not say if there was potential video evidence linked to the case. Nearly all abortions are banned in Texas, and abortion-inducing medication cannot be accessed through doctors or pharmacists in the state. Residents can, however, get the drugs through online providers. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
Undocumented students seek to challenge end of Texas in-state tuition
The Brief Undocumented students in Texas are seeking to challenge a court ruling that ended their access to in-state tuition rates. This comes after the U.S. Department of Justice and the state of Texas agreed to end a 2001 law that allowed in-state tuition for certain undocumented students. The students argue that ending the program could increase tuition costs by up to 810%, potentially forcing many of them to drop out of college. DALLAS - A group of undocumented students are asking a federal judge to allow them to challenge the court's ruling that ended their access to in-state tuition. The filing comes in response to a lawsuit filed by the U.S. Department of Justice against Texas over a 2001 law that allowed undocumented students who had lived in the state for more than three years and graduated from a Texas high school to attend public universities at the in-state rate. What they're saying The students are hoping for a chance to argue their case for the Texas Dream Act after and agreement was reached between the Department of Justice and the state to end the program on the same day the lawsuit was filed. Court documents state the average cost for SAT members to attend a college or university in the state will increase by up to 810% compared to their current rates. "Such an increase puts college out of reach for many students--some of whom have already spent years in college and will not afford to complete their program," SAT's attorneys said. The filing highlights several students across the state that may not be able to complete their degree if the Texas Dream Act is ended. One such student pursuing a Master of Science degree at the University of North Texas has been paying out of pocket for the program since 2020. "She has been able to afford her education because she was able to pay reduced tuition rates," court documents state. "However, she cannot afford to pay out-of-state tuition and will likely be forced to drop out of her program." Dig deeper For nearly 25 years, the Texas Dream Act has provided access to in-state tuition for thousands of undocumented migrant students at Texas colleges and universities. The law allowed for students without legal resident status to qualify for in-state tuition if they have lived in the state for three years before graduating from high school, and for a year before enrolling in college. They must also sign an affidavit promising to apply for legal resident status as soon as possible. The Texas Dream Act was signed into law by Republican Gov. Rick Perry with bipartisan support in the state legislature. Well before DACA provided federal protection to undocumented children, Texas was the first state to create this type of tuition program for them. Now more than a dozen states provide a similar program. The program serves around 20,000 students in Texas, according to the nonprofit organization Every Texan. Despite multiple Republican attempts to repeal the law, those efforts never made it to a full vote in the Texas house. The most recent attempt happened this session. Senate Bill 1798 passed out of committee on May 14, but was marked as "not placed again on intent calendar" on May 26. The settlement between the state and federal governments came just days after the most recent Texas legislative session ended. The Source Information in this article comes court documents filed in the District Court for the Northern District of Texas. Information on the Texas Dream Act comes from previous FOX 4 reporting.
