By Guy Page
Vermont Attorney General Charity Clark June 9 announced her office has joined a coalition of 16 state attorneys general in filing a federal lawsuit against the Trump Administration and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) over plans to redistribute thousands of previously seized machine gun conversion devices known as Forced Reset Triggers (FRTs).
Like the ‘bump stock’ lawsuits and court decisions, the lawsuit raises once again the constitutionality of devices purported to deliver a higher rate of fire.
The legal action, filed in federal court, challenges a recent settlement agreement by the ATF—signed under direction from the Trump Administration—that halts enforcement of federal restrictions on FRTs and directs the agency to return thousands of the illegal devices to the public. FRTs, which can enable semiautomatic firearms to fire at fully automatic rates, have previously been classified by the ATF as machine guns, which are banned under federal law.
Attorney General Pam Bondi affirmed the settlement as backed by the Second Amendment, and said it also will enhance public safety.
“This Department of Justice believes that the 2nd Amendment is not a second-class right,” said Bondi. “And we are glad to end a needless cycle of litigation with a settlement that will enhance public safety.”
In June 2024, in Cargill v. Garland, the Supreme Court held that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) exceeded its statutory authority by issuing a rule classifying a bump stock as a “machinegun.” In July 2024, the Northern District of Texas applied Cargill v. Garland to a device called a “forced-reset trigger” (FRT) and concluded that FRTs also cannot be classified as a “machinegun.”
The Department’s agreement with Rare Breed Triggers avoids the need for continued appeals in United States v. Rare Breed Triggers and continued litigation in other, related cases concerning the same issue. The settlement includes agreed-upon conditions that significantly advance public safety with respect to FRTs, including that Rare Breed will not develop or design FRTs for use in any pistol and will enforce its patents to prevent infringement that could threaten public safety. Rare Breed also agrees to promote the safe and responsible use of its products.
“The Trump administration’s decision to distribute illegal machine gun conversion devices in our communities will make us less safe,” said Attorney General Clark. “I am filing this lawsuit to prevent the implementation of this potentially disastrous directive from the Trump administration.”
The lawsuit argues that the ATF’s reversal is a clear violation of the National Firearms Act and the Gun Control Act, both of which prohibit the civilian possession of machine guns or devices that convert weapons into machine guns. FRTs allow rapid, continuous fire with a single sustained trigger pull—exceeding the firing rate of many military-grade automatic weapons, with the ability to discharge up to 20 rounds per second.
According to ATF data cited in the lawsuit, use of such conversion devices has increased dramatically, with a 1,400% spike in machine gun fire incidents between 2019 and 2021. Law enforcement agencies nationwide have increasingly encountered FRTs at crime scenes, including in cases of mass shootings and gang violence.
The lawsuit comes in the wake of conflicting federal court rulings on the legality of FRTs. While a New York judge affirmed that FRTs fall under the federal machine gun ban, a Texas judge ruled otherwise, creating a legal gray area. The Trump Administration’s recent settlement, announced on May 16, effectively nullifies enforcement efforts by the ATF and dismisses pending appeals—steps the plaintiff states say subvert federal law.
The coalition is seeking a preliminary injunction to stop the distribution of the devices while the case proceeds. In addition to Vermont, the states participating in the lawsuit include Colorado, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawai‘i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, Rhode Island, and Washington.
The coalition argues that the settlement not only violates established gun laws but also poses an immediate threat to public safety. “This is not just a legal issue—it’s a public safety crisis in the making,” Clark added.