1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

JENNIFER VANDERSTOK, et al., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

MERRICK GARLAND, in his official capacity as Attorney 

General of the United States, et al.,

Defendants. 

Case No. 4:22-cv-00691-O 

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMICI CURIAE BRIEF OF 

GUN OWNERS FOR SAFETY AND 

INDIVIDUAL CO-AMICI 

 Gun Owners for Safety and five individuals affiliated with the organization 

respectfully move for leave to file an amici curiae brief in support of Defendants’ 

opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion for a preliminary injunction. The proposed brief is attached 

as Exhibit A. As set forth below, the proposed brief brings important and different 

perspectives to the Court’s attention that are not already discussed by the parties, and which 

are directly relevant to the issues presented in Plaintiffs’ motion. 

 Pursuant to L.R. 7.1(b)(2), counsel for the amici informed counsel for Plaintiffs and 

Defendants of the amici’s intent to file an amici curiae brief. In response, Defendants 

stated that they do not oppose the filing of the brief, and Plaintiffs stated that they “do not 

consent to the filing of [the] amicus brief at this stage of the litigation. It is unclear to us 

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 42 Filed 08/29/22 Page 1 of 8 PageID 476
2 

how your clients would aid the Court in its review of the preliminary injunction factors 

here.” Contrary to Plaintiffs’ view, the amici have interests and perspectives directly 

relevant to the Court’s review, and the proposed brief is directly relevant to the preliminary 

injunction analysis, including specifically the factors addressing likelihood of success on 

the merits, whether Plaintiffs will suffer irreparable harm without the requested injunction, 

and the interests of the public. These interests include those of individuals within the 

jurisdiction of the Court—the Texas chapter of Gun Owners for Safety and Mr. Speier who 

resides within the jurisdiction. While Plaintiff Firearms Policy Coalition, whose members 

include the remaining Plaintiffs in this case, states that its purpose is to “defend[] and 

promot[e] the People’s rights—especially but not limited to First and Second Amendment 

rights,” Compl. ¶ 15—the amici wish to make clear their firm respect for such rights in 

supporting the Rule. As their proposed brief explains, the Rule does not impact most athome gun builders, and it is not a hardship for law-abiding individuals or companies who 

are impacted by the Rule to comply with it. 

 Accordingly, Gun Owners for Safety and the five individuals affiliated with Gun 

Owners for Safety respectfully request that the Court grant this motion and accept the 

proposed amici curiae brief. 

ARGUMENT 

 Proposed amicus curiae Gun Owners for Safety is a united coalition of gun owners 

from varied backgrounds and political affiliations who believe lives can be saved through 

commonsense gun laws that do not infringe upon the civil rights of law-abiding gun 

owners. With chapters in Texas and across the country, including Colorado, Florida, 

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 42 Filed 08/29/22 Page 2 of 8 PageID 477
3 

Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania, and Virginia, we work to prevent gun violence while 

supporting and protecting Second Amendment rights. Gun Owners for Safety has over 

20,000 members, who include experienced gun owners of all trades and hobbies, including 

law enforcement, military, hunting, sport shooting, collecting, and building guns. In Texas 

alone, Gun Owners for Safety has 1,200 gun owner members, including 60 volunteer 

ambassadors who have educated the public and lawmakers through such activities as 

hosting seminars and testifying before the State Legislature. Affiliated with Giffords, the 

gun safety organization co-founded and led by Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords, who is 

a gun owner herself, we fully respect the Second Amendment and are simultaneously 

devoted to encouraging safe and responsible gun ownership practices and promoting a shift 

in culture to inform Americans about ways to improve safe gun ownership, including 

commonsense gun laws. 

 The five affiliated individuals who are also proposed amici curiae are: Jason Perry, 

Deputy Engagement Director for Gun Owners for Safety; Ryan Busse, a Senior Advisor to 

Gun Owners for Safety and Giffords; Jonathan Gold, a Senior Ambassador for Gun Owners 

for Safety in Michigan; Steven Kling, a Senior Ambassador for Gun Owners for Safety in 

Texas; and Scott Spreier, a Senior Ambassador for Gun Owners for Safety in Texas. All 

five are experienced gun owners who have worked, respectively, as a firefighter, an 

executive in the firearms industry, a firearm instructor, a member of the Army, and a 

member of the Air Force, and each is passionate about the importance of the serialization 

of firearms as a key tool for law enforcement to fight crime and bring justice for victims of 

gun violence. 

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 42 Filed 08/29/22 Page 3 of 8 PageID 478
4 

 As law-abiding gun owners, the members of Gun Owners for Safety and the five 

individual proposed co-amici have a direct and substantial interest in the subject matter of 

this case—Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (“ATF”) Final Rule 2021R-05F, 

entitled Definition of “Frame or Receiver” and Identification of Firearms (the “Rule”)—

and in Plaintiffs’ challenge to the Rule in its motion seeking a preliminary injunction. As 

important, Gun Owners for Safety, its membership, and the individual co-amici provide a 

unique perspective on the questions at the heart of Plaintiffs’ motion. 

 Specifically, the proposed brief offers an overview of the rich traditions of gun 

building in the United States and highlights the distinction between guns built from scratch 

and guns built from manufactured parts, including fully manufactured and partially 

manufactured parts. An accurate understanding of gun building in the United States is 

necessary to appreciating the scope of the Rule and properly addressing Plaintiffs’ 

challenge to it. Members of Gun Owners for Safety possess the highly specialized 

knowledge to provide this understanding. Gun Owners for Safety members, including two 

of the five individual amici, have built guns from scratch, and have also built guns from 

fully or partially manufactured components, knowing firsthand the relative ease with which 

guns can be assembled from a kit of fully or partially finished parts. The coalition can 

therefore offer invaluable context for the true impact of the Rule on those who build guns 

at home, including the proposed individual amici who engage in at-home gun making. 

 Although no Federal Rule of Civil Procedure governs the filing of an amicus brief 

in district court, it is well-established that amicus briefs can serve a useful role. As thenJudge Alito noted with respect to amicus briefs, “the fundamental assumption of our 

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 42 Filed 08/29/22 Page 4 of 8 PageID 479
5 

adversary system [is] that strong (but fair) advocacy on behalf of opposing views promotes 

sound decision making. Thus, an amicus who makes a strong but responsible presentation 

in support of a party can truly serve as the court’s friend.” Neonatology Assocs. v. Comm’r 

of Internal Revenue, 293 F.3d 128, 131 (3d Cir. 2002). “Even when a party is very well 

represented, an amicus may provide important assistance to the court,” with contributions 

ranging from “‘collect[ing] background or factual references that merit judicial notice,’” 

providing “‘particular expertise not possessed by any party to the case,’” and 

“‘explain[ing] the impact a potential holding might have on an industry or other group.’” 

Id. (quoting Luther T. Munford, When Does the Curiae Need An Amicus?, 1 J. App. Prac. 

& Process 279 (1999)). The Fifth Circuit likewise observes that “courts should welcome 

amicus briefs for one simple reason: ‘[I]t is for the honour of a court of justice to avoid 

error in their judgments.’” Lefebure v. D’Aquilla, 15 F.4th 670, 675 (5th Cir. 2021) 

(citation omitted). Consistent with these authorities, this Court has granted amicus briefs 

for similar reasons. See, e.g., Order Granting Motion for Leave to File, Texas et al. v. 

United States, et al., No. 4:18-cv-00167-O (N.D. Tex. May 5, 2018); Order Granting 

Motion to File Amicus Letter, United States v. The Boeing Company, 4:21-cr-5-O (N.D. 

Tex. April 29, 2022). By providing a unique and relevant perspective as individuals whose 

activities relate to ATF regulations, who can explain precisely which activities are affected 

by the Rule, and who can offer a perspective not often heard regarding gun owners not 

opposed to commonsense firearm regulation, the proposed brief of Gun Owners for Safety 

and the five individual co-amici serves as a friend of the Court in its evaluation of Plaintiffs’ 

motion. 

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 42 Filed 08/29/22 Page 5 of 8 PageID 480
6 

 Contrary to Plaintiffs’ view, the proposed amici and their proposed brief are directly 

relevant to the Court’s review of Plaintiffs’ pending motion. As shown above, the 

proposed amici have interests directly relevant to the subject matter of this case and the 

Court’s review of the pending motion. And as the proposed amici brief shows, it directly 

addresses several elements of the preliminary injunction analysis. This includes whether 

Plaintiffs’ motion is likely to succeed on the merits (see, e.g., Ex. A at 24-25), whether 

Plaintiffs will be irreparably harmed under the Rule (see, e.g., Ex. A at 15-17, 21-23), and 

whether the public would be disserved if the Rule were enjoined (see, e.g., Ex. A at 6-9). 

 Indeed, for two similar motions seeking to preliminarily and/or permanently enjoin 

the Rule, both courts granted leave for the filing of similar amicus briefs. See Order 

Granting Motion for Leave to File, Morehouse Enters. LLC v. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, 

Firearms & Explosives, No. 3:22-cv-00116 (D. N.D. Aug. 16, 2022), ECF No. 51; Brief 

of Amici Curiae Gun Owners for Safety, Jonathan Gold, Jason Perry, and Scott Spreier, 

Morehouse Enters. LLC (Aug. 16, 2022), ECF No. 52; Order Granting Motion for Leave 

to File, Division 80 LLC v. Garland, No. 3:22-cv-00148 (S.D. Tex. July 12, 2022), ECF 

No. 38; Brief of Amicus Curiae Gun Owners for Safety, Division 80 LLC (July 8, 2022), 

ECF No. 26-1. Proposed amici respectfully submit that the amici brief proposed to this 

Court likewise provides relevant perspectives and arguments, and leave for filing should 

be granted. 

CONCLUSION 

 Gun Owners for Safety and the five individual co-amici respectfully seek leave to 

file their proposed amici curiae brief. 

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 42 Filed 08/29/22 Page 6 of 8 PageID 481
7 

Respectfully submitted, on August 29, 2022. 

/s/ Rebecca Wernicke Anthony

Rebecca Wernicke Anthony 

 Texas Bar No. 24093345 

JONES DAY 

2727 North Harwood Street 

Dallas, Texas 75201 

Telephone: 214.969.4886 

Facsimile: 214.969-5100 

ranthony@jonesday.com 

Barbara Mack Harding 

 Attorney-in-Charge 

 D.C. Bar No. 419250 

 (pro hac vice pending) 

Jennifer L. Swize 

 D.C. Bar No. 490988 

 (pro hac vice pending) 

Megan E. Ball 

 D.C. Bar No. 1708286 

 (pro hac vice pending) 

Joseph J. Kiessling 

 D.C. Bar No. 1630477 

 (pro hac vice pending) 

JONES DAY 

51 Louisiana Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20001 

Telephone: (202) 879-3939 

Facsimile: (202) 626-1700 

Angela A. Korge 

 Florida Bar No. 125419 

 (pro hac vice pending) 

JONES DAY 

600 Brickell Ave, Ste 3300 

Miami, FL 33131 

Telephone: (305) 714-9700 

Facsimile: (305) 714-9799 

 

Counsel for Amici Curiae

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 42 Filed 08/29/22 Page 7 of 8 PageID 482
8 

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE 

 Counsel for Amici Curiae sought conference via e-mail on August 26, 2022, with 

counsel for both Plaintiffs and Defendants. Defendants consent to the filing of the brief. 

Plaintiffs oppose filing of the brief. 

 /s/ Jennifer L. Swize_______ 

 Jennifer L. Swize 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I, Rebecca W. Anthony, hereby certify that on this 29th day of August, 2022, a true 

and correct copy of the foregoing document was transmitted using the CM/ECF system, 

which automatically sends notice and a copy of the filing to all counsel of record. 

 /s/ Rebecca Wernicke Anthony 

 Rebecca Wernicke Anthony

Case 4:22-cv-00691-O Document 42 Filed 08/29/22 Page 8 of 8 PageID 483