Florida renews lawsuit challenging federal ‘gun show loophole’, cites lower turnout

TALLAHASSEE — Florida this week renewed a lawsuit challenging a the new federal rule requiring more gun sellers to be licensed and conduct background checks on buyers, in part pointing to lower attendance at gun shows.

State attorneys raised the issue of the gun show because they said the rule reduces tax revenue from the purchase of admission tickets. Lawyers for the Biden administration argued last month that an initial version of the lawsuit should be dismissed because the state had not shown legal standing — a problem that the loss of tax revenue could solve.

The revised lawsuit, filed Monday in federal court in Tampa, said “the harm asserted — the loss of tax revenue — is clear and ongoing.”

“Typically, Florida gun shows in the summer months of June, July and August enjoy high attendance rates – often hosting thousands of people at a single show,” attorneys from Attorney General Ashley Moody’s office wrote. “But since the challenged rule went into effect on May 20, attendance at these summer gun shows across the state has plummeted. In some parts of Florida, overall attendance at such shows has dropped by as much as 50 percent, costing the state revenue. of the 6% sales tax he would have earned on each admission ticket.”

Moody filed the initial version of the lawsuit on May 1, shortly after the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives finalized the rule. The rule is an outgrowth of a 2022 federal law known as the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act that made changes to the longstanding background check system.

When the rule was finalized, the Biden administration said it was designed to close “loopholes” in the system that requires licensed gun dealers to conduct background checks. An overview posted on the White House Web site said that “a growing number of unlicensed sellers continue to sell firearms for profit to prey on strangers they encounter at gun shows and online marketplaces , which represented a critical gap in background check laws.”

In part, the rule changed the definition of being “engaged in business” as a firearms dealer who must be licensed, according to a motion filed last month by U.S. Justice Department lawyers seeking to dismiss the original version of the lawsuit. The revised definition applies to “a person who devotes time, attention, and labor to the trade in firearms as a regular course of trade or business for the purpose of principally obtaining profit through the repetitive purchase and resale of firearms. The term does not include a person who makes occasional sales, trades or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal collection or for a hobby or who sells all or part of the person’s personal collection of firearms.”

Attorneys for the Justice Department argued in the motion that the definition closely tracks the 2022 law. But Florida argues that the rule violates what is known as the federal Administrative Procedure Act, saying in the revised lawsuit that “the Biden administration is now seeking to exploit the minor changes federal law passed in the BSCA (Bipartisan Safe Communities Act) to implement President Biden’s provisions. policies preferred by the executive”.

While most states rely on the FBI to conduct background checks, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement handles background checks in Florida.

In both the original and revised versions of its lawsuit, state attorneys argued that the rule would force the FDLE to conduct more background checks, requiring more resources. But in an attempt to show that Florida has legal standing, the revised lawsuit added the gun show fee issue and said the rule could pressure the state to change its background check laws.

The revised lawsuit said Florida “enacted a statute relying on the status quo, and the defendants disrupted that status quo by implementing an illegal regulation.”

But in the motion to dismiss the original version of the lawsuit, Justice Department lawyers said Florida “made a voluntary decision to add a layer of red tape” and as a result has no standing to challenge the rule.

“The Federal Bureau of Investigation operates the federal firearms background check system and provides comprehensive background check services to states free of charge,” the motion said. “Most states rely on the FBI to conduct background checks, and those states do not bear the costs or burdens of background checks. The federal government did not force Florida to conduct background checks; Florida has voluntarily taken on this task.”

After the revised lawsuit was filed, U.S. District Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell issued an order Tuesday saying the motion to dismiss the original version was moot.