Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 1 of 236

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS

MARIA DEL SOCORRO MALINOWSKI, ) FILED

individually and as a personal representative ) U.S. DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT ARKANSAS
of the Estate of Bryan K. Malinowski, )
deceased, and on behalf of the wrongful death ) MAY 15 2025
beneficiaries of Bryan K. Malinowski, ) CLERK
)
DEPCLERK
Plaintiff, )

v. l) CaseNo.l.\:25-Cl/- ~-W,l
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )
BUREAU OF ALCOHOL, TOBACCO, )
FIREARMS AND EXPLOSIVES (ATF), )
TIMOTHY BOLES, TROY DILLARD, )
CLAYTON MERRILL, TYLER COWART, )
MATTHEW SPRINKLES, JAMES BASS, ) l l· \ \ ~-
MICHAEL GIBBONS, CHRIS GRlfilf?~ase assigned to 0\5:ria Judgel"\J\ \el_
~~ON HICKS, and AMY NE~~~ to Magist)ate Judge_._ V..1.olU\u{)P~~
-----
md1v1dually, ) ~
Defendants. )

COMPLAINT

Plaintiff Maria ("Maer") Malinowski, individually, as personal representative of her

husband's estate, and on behalf of the wrongful death beneficiaries of Bryan K.

Malinowski, brings this Complaint seeking damages against Defendants for their

unreasonable and unlawful acts of the predawn morning of March 19, 2024, which

culminated-less than two minutes after they arrived-in the killing of her husband acting

in defense of her and their home. In the darkness of that morning, A1F forced entry into

their home, broke down the door with a battering ram and, once inside, shot and killed

Bryan Malinowski in front of his panic-stricken wife. The A1F predicated this ultimate

I
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 2 of 236

seizure of his person on a federal search warrant sought and issued based on suspicion and

belief that Mr. Malinowski, the Executive Director of the Bill and Hillary Clinton (Little

Rock) National Airport with no criminal history or indication of being a threat, was acting

as a firearms dealer without having secured a $200 firearms license. But the Constitution

rightfully requires more of law enforcement, and is designed to prevent this very tragedy.

The Constitution requires reasonableness and, specifically here, that Defendants both

knock and announce their presence and purpose and wait a reasonable time before entry.

The ATF failed to do so, resulting in an entirely predictable, needless and tragic outcome.

The United States should be held liable under the Federal Tort Claims Act and the

Individual Defendants held liable under Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed

Bureau ofNarcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).

I. INTRODUCTION
1. "The law does not require us to close our minds to facts which are known to

all reasonably intelligent people ... If a person is awakened by banging on the door, an

immediate and appropriate response may not be feasible. For at least a brief period, the

erstwhile sleeper is likely to be too bewildered to react. He or she must then focus on the

possibility that those demanding entry may have no legitimate business on the premises.

This is especially true ... [when] the bedroom is a considerable distance from the door, so

that a suddenly awakened individual may not hear the officer's oral announcements

identifying [themselves] as police officers armed with a search warrant ... Moreover, most

citizens are not clad ... in a manner suitable for opening the door to strangers. If someone

is not dressed, sufficiently or at all, dressing takes time. Finally, for most people awakened

2
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 3 of 236

or startled by loud banging [early] in the morning, the circumstances are not likely to be

conducive to rational analysis or to swift or provident decision-making." Griffin v. United

States, 618 A.2d 114, 121 (D.C. Cir. 1992) (internal citations omitted).

2. Officers' entry into the home of an unaware person "may provoke violence

in supposed self-defense by the surprised resident." Hudson v. Michigan, 541 U.S. 586,

594 (2006).

3. Before dawn on the morning of March 19, 2024, ten carloads of federal and

state law enforcement officers assembled in the dark and arrived in a quiet cul-de-sac in

Little Rock, Arkansas.

4. At 6:02:42 a.m., seven ATF agents and task force officers stacked onto the

front porch steps of 4 Durance Court, a large gray stucco home, while the family who lived

there slept inside.

S. Inside the home Bryan Malinowski laid in bed next to his wife of25 years,

Maer Malinowski, and their two pug dogs.

6. The carloads of agents and task force officers had assembled in the dark that

morning to execute a search warrant on the Malinowski home. Bryan's suspected crime?

Failing to secure a $200 federal firearms license before selling firearms at local gun shows.

7. ATF agents covered up the Malinowskis' video doorbell camera with tape,

and less than one minute later, the team leader ordered agents to pry open the locked, glass

storm doors and break down the inner, wooden doors with a battering ram to breach the

entry.

8. Less than 20 seconds later, at 6:03:46 a.m., gunshots rang out, and Bryan

3
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 4 of 236

Malinowski crumpled to the ground, shot in the head by an A1F agent following an

exchange of gunfire.

9. Bryan had scrambled out of bed and crept into the dark hallway with his gun

to protect himself and his wife from whom he reasonably believed were intruders. He did

not know that he was under investigation, much less that the people who broke down his

front doors were law enforcement, because they failed to adequately knock and announce

their presence and give him a reasonable time to wake up and come to the door.

10. Bryan's wife, Maer, did not heed his direction to stay in their bedroom, and

instead followed her husband into the dark hallway where she saw him shot in the head.

11. It was only after the exchange of gunfire when Maer heard a demand to put

her hands up that she learned the men who broke down her front door and shot her husband

were federal agents.

12. Bryan Malinowski succumbed to his injuries two days later at the hospital,

on March 21, 2024. He was 53 years old.

13. More than 75 years ago, the Supreme Court grimly anticipated this scenario,

noting:

many home-owners in this crime-beset city doubtless are armed. When a

woman sees a strange man, in plain clothes, prying up her bedroom window
and climbing in, her natural impulse would be to shoot. A plea of justifiable
homicide might result awkwardly for enforcement officers. But an officer
seeing a gun being drawn on him might shoot first. Under the circumstances
of this case, I should not want the task of convincing a jury that it was not
murder. I have no reluctance in condemning as unconstitutional a method of
law enforcement so reckless and so fraught with danger and discredit to the
law enforcement agencies themselves.

McDonald v. United States, 335 U.S. 451,461 (1948).

4
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 5 of 236

14. Maer Malinowski, individually, as personal representative of the Estate of

Bryan K. Malinowski, and on behalf of the wrongful death beneficiaries of Bryan K.

Malinowski, brings this action against the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and

Explosives ("ATF") and the United States of America ("USA") under the Federal Tort

Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ l346(b), 2671-80; and brings this civil rights action against the

individual defendant officers pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of the

Federal Bureau ofNarcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971).

II, JURISDICTION AND VENUE

IS. This action is brought pursuant to the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §§

2671 et seq. & § 1346, et seq. for money damages for death and other injuries caused by

institutional failures and the negligent or wrongful acts or omissions of one or more

employees of the United States government while acting within the course and scope of

their office or employment under circumstances where Defendant USA, if a private person,

would be liable to Plaintiff in accordance with Arkansas law.

16. This Court has original jurisdiction over Plaintiff's federal civil rights claims

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1343, 1346. The Court has supplemental jurisdiction over

Plaintiff's state law claims pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367.

17. This action arises out of an incident that occurred in Pulaski County,

Arkansas, the same county in which Plaintiff resides. Pulaski County lies in the Eastern

District of Arkansas, Central Division.

18. Venue is appropriate in this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391 as a

substantial part of the acts or omissions which give rise to this cause of action occurred in

5
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 6 of 236

Pulaski County, Arkansas, which lies within the Eastern District of Arkansas.

19. The United States of America has waived its immunity from suit for the acts

and omissions set forth herein under the Federal Tort Claims Act ("FTCA") pursuant to

28. U.S.C. § 1346(b), 2401(b), 2671, et seq.

20. Further, Plaintiff's action against the individual Defendants is authorized

pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents ofthe Federal Bureau ofNarcotics, 403

U.S. 388 (1971).

III, CONDITIONS PRECEDENT

21. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2675(a), Plaintiff timely presented her claims to the

United States by submitting administrative tort claims within the applicable time period,

which were denied by the United States of America by letter dated January 10, 2025.

22. Plaintiff's action under the FTCA is brought within six (6) months after the

denial of their administrative tort claims was mailed.

23. Plaintiff has exhausted her administrative remedies under the Federal Tort

Claims Act and has fully complied with the statutory prerequisites for bringing this tort

action against the Defendant USA.

IY,PARTIES
24. Plaintiff Maer Malinowski, the surviving spouse of Bryan Malinowski, was

appointed personal representative of the Estate of Bryan K. Malinowski on April 12, 2024,

by Order of the Circuit Court of Pulaski County, Arkansas in Case No. 60PR-24-812. A

copy of the Probate Order is attached as Ex. A. Plaintiff sues both individually and as the

personal representative of the Estate of Bryan K. Malinowsi, and is the proper person to

6
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 7 of 236

bring suit on behalf of the Estate of Bryan K. Malinowski pursuant to the Arkansas Survival

of Actions Statute, Ark. Code Ann §16-62-l0l(a)(l) and on behalf of the wrongful death

beneficiaries of Bryan K. Malinowski pursuant to the Arkansas Wrongful Death Statute,

Ark. Code Ann. § 16-62-102(b). Maer Malinowski is, and at all times during the incident

that is the subject of this Complaint, was a resident of Little Rock, Pulaski County,

Arkansas.

25. Defendant United States of America acted through Defendant Bureau of

Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives ("ATF'') and its agents, its task force officers,

and ancillary Little Rock Police Department ("LRPD") officers during the ATF's execution

of a search warrant at the home of Bryan Malinowski on March 19, 2024.

26. Defendant ATF, at all relevant times, acted as an agent of the United States

of America as a federal law enforcement agency under color of law.

27. Defendant Timothy Boles, at all relevant times, was a special agent with the

ATF, and acted under the color of federal law. He is sued in his individual capacity.

28. Defendant Troy Dillard, at all relevant times, was a special agent with the

ATF, and acted under the color of federal law. He is sued in his individual capacity.

29. Defendant Clayton Merrill, at all relevant times, was the resident agent in

charge of the Little Rock ATF office, and acted under the color of federal law. He is sued

in his individual capacity.

30. Defendant Tyler Cowart, at all relevant times, was a special agent with the

ATF, and acted under the color of federal law. He is sued in his individual capacity.

31. Defendant Matthew Sprinkles, at all relevant times, was a special agent with

7
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 8 of 236

the ATF, and acted under the color of federal law. He is sued in his individual capacity.

32. Defendant James Bass, at all relevant times, was a special agent with the

ATF, and acted under the color of federal law. He is sued in his individual capacity.

33. Defendant Michael Gibbons, at all relevant times, was a law enforcement

officer employed by the North Little Rock Police Department, who was affiliated and

embedded as a Task Force Officer ("TFO") with the ATF office based in Little Rock,

Arkansas, and acted under the color of federal law. He is sued in his individual capacity.

34. Defendant Chris Griggs, at all relevant times, was a law enforcement officer

employed by the Mississippi County (Arkansas) Sheriff's Office, who was affiliated and

embedded as a Task Force Officer ("TFO") with the ATF office based in Little Rock,

Arkansas, and acted under the color of federal law. He is sued in his individual capacity.

35. Defendant Shannon Hicks, at all relevant times, was a special agent with the

ATF, and acted under the color of federal law. She is sued in her individual capacity.

36. Defendant Amy Ness, at all relevant times, was a special agent with the ATF,

and a~ted under the color of federal law. She is sued in her individual capacity.

V. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

37. Bryan Malinowski was a lifelong collector. As a child he started collecting

coins, a hobby he carried into his adulthood. Several years ago, his father handed him down

his gun collection, which sparked Bryan's interest in firearms. He became a gun collector

and hobbyist.

38. One of Bryan's interests was attending gun shows on the weekends, where

he would set up a table, display his guns and coins, and buy, sell, and trade with others.

8
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 9 of 236

39. Federal law charges the ATF with promulgating rules and regulations,

through the Code of Federal Regulations, 1 which are necessary to carry out the provisions

18 U.S.C. Chapter 44.2

40. In March 2024, federal regulations did not require an individual seller to hold

a federal firearms license ("FFL") as a dealer in firearms unless that individual's principal

objective in selling firearms was livelihood and profit. 27 CFR Part 478.

41. Specifically, in March 2024, 27 C.F.R § 478.11 defined a "dealer in firearms"

as "[a] person who devotes time, attention, and labor to dealing in firearms ... with the

principal objective of livelihood and profit." 21 C.F.R. § 478.11 ("Engaged in the

business," subsection (c)) (emphasis added).

42. At the time of his death, Bryan Malinowski was the highest paid city

employee in the city of Little Rock as the Executive Director of the Little Rock Airport,

where he earned an annual salary of more than $260,000.

43. Upon information and belief, Bryan did not believe that by selling at gun

shows he was engaging in conduct "with the principal objective of livelihood and profit,"

and therefore did not believe he needed an FFL to sell firearms at gun shows.

1 See 18 U.S.C. § 926 (Attorney General is granted rule-making authority); see also 28 C.F.R. §
0.130(c) (Attorney General delegates rule-making authority to the A TF); ATF Final Rule 03-1657
(redesignating 28 C.F.R. § 47, with relevant parts designated as 28 C.F.R. § 478).
2 27 C.F.R. § 478.l states that "[t]he regulations contained in this part ... are promulgated to
implement ... 18 U.S.C. Chapter 44, of the Gun Control Act of 1968."

9
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 10 of 236

A. The ATF's Investigation and Search Warrant for the Malinowski Home

44. In December 2023, the ATF opened an investigation and began following

Bryan to and from work and on the weekends, placing a tracker on his car, and surveilling

his daily activities.

45. During the investigation, at least two agents acting undercover interacted

with Bryan at a gun show in Arkansas. Bryan answered one of the undercover agent's

inquiries by noting that he was a private seller, meaning he believed he did not need an

FFL.

46. During their investigation, ATF learned a lot about Bryan.

4 7. They knew he worked in a secure environment at the airport, where guns

were not allowed.

48. They knew he had lived a law-abiding life with no criminal history, that he

lived at home with his wife and two dogs, and that they kept a very regular schedule.

49. Bryan had no reason to believe that he was under investigation for violating

federal law.

50. Bryan never received a letter of inquiry, audit, personal visit, or request for

information from the ATF; nor did he ever receive a target or subject letter from the

Department of Justice notifying him that he was under investigation.

51. On March 6, 2024, ATF Special Agent Troy Dillard obtained two federal

search warrants, which authorized federal agents to search the Malinowski home and

Bryan's vehicle for firearms, ammunition, electronics, sales records, and correspondence.

52. Importantly, it was not an arrest warrant. Nor did it set forth any facts that

10
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 11 of 236

would lead any person to believe Mr. Malinowski would evade law enforcement, fail to

cooperate, be dangerous, or pose a threat or risk of destroying evidence.

B. ATF's Efforts to Close the "Gun Show Loophole" and Announcement of Rule
Change One Month After Bryan is Killed

53. On April 11, 2024, less than a month after the ATF raid that killed Bryan,

the ATF announced a new rule to "close the gun show loophole," and expand the definition

of what it meant to be "engaged in the business" of selling firearms, newly requiring anyone

who sells guns at a profit to register as a federally licensed firearms dealer. ATF, Final

Rule, Definition of "Engaged in the Business' as a Dealer in Firearms, (April 11, 2024),

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/final-rule-definition-engaged-business-dealer-firearms.

54. Specifically, the new rule revised 27 C.F.R. § 478.11 to change the definition

of "engaged in the business" to remove the word "livelihood," thus reading "with the

principal objective of profit."

55. The law at the time had been "vague, exempting people who occasionally

sold guns as a hobby but not spelling out how many sales was too many." Eduardo Medina,

THE NEW YORK TIMES, What Set the ATF and an Airport Leader on the Path to a Deadly

Encounter?, May 24, 2024, https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/24/us/bryan-malinowski-

arkansas-atf-guns.html.

56. Before the rule change, the Everytown Research and Policy nonprofit, which

advocated for the new administrative rule, published a paper noting that the "lack of clarity

in the federal definition of 'engaging in the business' of selling firearms has created a hazy

arena between firearm dealers who must obtain a license, and occasional sellers who need

11
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 12 of 236

not obtain a license or conduct background checks." Everytown, Nov. 12, 2015, Business

as Usual Report, https://everytownresearch.org/report/business-as-usual/.

57. The new administrative rule aimed to "close the gun show loophole," a move

touted by the then-administration as the most significant increase in U.S. gun regulation in

decades. Perry Stein, THE WASHINGTON POST, "Biden Rule to Close Gun Show Loophole

is Final, Increasing Background Checks," April 11, 2024,

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/2024/04/11 /gun-show-loophole-

closed-biden-atf/.

58. Meanwhile, the change worried law-abiding gun owners nationwide about

how the revision would target them as responsible gun owners. 12 NEWS Now, Gun owners

concerned in light ofBiden administration's crackdown on 'gun show loophole,' April 15,

2024, https://www.l2newsnow.com/article/news/local/gun-owners-concemed-in-light-of-

biden-administrations-crackdown-gun-show-loophole/502-cdefa485-149b-4df6-a074-

825f'Oflbl527.

59. The New York Times called the new regulation, which did not go into effect

for another month until May 2024, "the broadest expansion of federal background checks

in decades" and "likely to face legal challenges." Glenn Thrush & Erica Green, THE NEW

YORK DMES, Biden Administration Approves Expansion of Background Checks on Gun

Sales, (April 11, 2024), https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/l l/us/politics/biden-guns-

background-checks.html.

60. In the months preceding his death, even though ATF's new regulation

intended to tighten the definition of a person "engaged in the business of selling firearms"

12
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 13 of 236

had not yet gone into effect, the ATF concluded Bryan Malinowski had crossed the

ambiguously defined line and violated federal law by not holding an FFL.

61. They decided his suspected infraction was serious enough to warrant a pre-

dawn dynamic raid at his home while they knew he and his family would be sleeping.

C. ATF Develops its Operations Plan, Recognizing Bryan Was Not Dangerous

62. According to Special Agent Timothy Boles, the Arkansas ATF office is a

small office, and "anytime anybody's running an investigation, the other people know

what's going on."

63. As lead investigator, Special Agent Troy Dillard drafted and submitted the

ATF Operations Plan for the execution of the search warrant at the Malinowski home.

64. The Operations Plan was approved and signed by Special Agent in Charge

(SAC) Clayton Merrill.

65. Nothing in the Operations Plan indicated Bryan posed a danger to himself or

others, or that he was not expected to comply with law enforcement if he knew they were

at his door.

66. The ATF agents-including Agent Boles-knew that Bryan did not pose a

threat to their safety or the safety of others during the anticipated execution of the search

warrant.

67. Specifically, ATF investigative officers would learn during their months-

long investigation leading up to Bryan's death that Bryan did not pose an immediate threat

to their safety or the safety of others during the search; that Bryan had no criminal history

or history of violence; that Bryan had never threatened law enforcement officers; and that

13
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 14 of 236

Bryan's wife and dogs lived with him and would be present during a pre-dawn search

warrant execution at the family home.

68. The agents never observed any person or event, and received no information

that would change the circumstances as they understood them at the time Agent Dillard

created, and RAC Merrill approved, the Operations Plan.

69. According to Special Agent Shannon Hicks, Mr. Malinowski was "the last

person I would have imagined that we would have been in an armed confrontation with."

70. According to Special Agent Tyler Cowart, "[w]e thought this would be an

easy search warrant and we'd be out of there pretty quick. And [Mr. Malinowski] would

cooperate and everything, and it was supposed to be easy."

71. There was no indication or belief at any time that evidence would be, or was

being, destroyed.

72. Special Agent Dillard documented in the Operations Plan, and the agents and

task force officers were aware, that:

a. Bryan Malinowski was the director of the Bill and Hillary Clinton
National Airport in Little Rock, Arkansas;

b. He had no criminal history and no history of violence;

c. He lived at home with his wife and possibly a small-sized dog;

d. There were no other known occupants of the home;

e. Based on data obtained from a OPS tracking device that ATF placed
on his vehicle, Bryan was not expected to leave for work until
approximately 9:00 to 10:00 a.m.;

f. That Bryan worked in a gun-free zone, an airport;

14
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 15 of 236

g. That Bryan's home was situated on a 0.6 acre lot located at the end of
a cul-de-sac;

h. Based on county records, Bryan's home was a large, single-story

home, approximately 2,780 square feet with four (4) bedrooms, three
(3) full bathrooms, and two (2) half bathrooms. According to Special
Agent Adam Bass, it was "a big house."

73. There was no indication or belief by law enforcement prior to or during the

forced entry that Mr. Malinowski or his wife were a danger to any person or that they would

not comply with the agents' requests or would in any way inhibit the agents' ability to

execute the search warrant.

D. ATF Plans and Prepares for a High-Risk Dynamic Entry

74. According to Agent Hicks, the vast majority of the search warrants executed

by the Arkansas ATF team are dynamic entries, and that when ATF makes a dynamic entry

into a home, they are usually "dealing with violent armed career criminals and drug

dealers ... [that's] the bulk of the types of cases that we work."

7S. According to the Operations Plan, if a "reasonable time" passed with no

response, the entry team leader would give the command for the team to conduct a "limited

penetration."

76. A "limited penetration" is a type of dynamic entry where an ATF agent

carrying the shield enters first. The agent with the shield then stops a foot or two inside

the threshold of the door, followed by additional agents visually securing each part of the

home visible from the front door threshold. Agents then call out to the occupants.

77. In the wake of the chaos of ATF's 1993 raid of the Branch Davidian

compound in Waco, Texas, the agency came under significant public criticism and

1S
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 16 of 236

congressional scrutiny for using excessive force m carrying out their enforcement

responsibilities.

78. The resulting federal review of AlF's use of force and operations concluded

that a "dynamic entry, which relies on speed and surprise and may involve forced entry, is

a preferred tactic during high-risk operations-those where A1F believes that suspects

pose a threat of violence or in operations where evidence can be easily destroyed," and that

"a dynamic entry could be planned only after all other tactical options had been

considered." See United States General Accounting Office ("GAO"), REPORT, Use of

Force, at 6-7, https://www.gao.gov/assets/ggd-96-17.pdf

79. Additionally, "through the use of dynamic entries in certain high-risk

situations, law enforcement agents hope to act so quickly that the suspects do not have time

to respond or, at a minimum, give agents the advantage by forcing suspects to react to agent

actions rather than the reverse." Id. at 49.

80. The GAO use-of-force report noted dynamic entries are meant to reduce "the

potential for suspects to react to notification of warrant service." Id. at 7.

81. Additionally, the GAO's Use of Force report identified several scenarios

exemplary of ATF's dynamic entry when executing a search warrant in "high-risk"

scenarios, including the following:

An ATF agent knocks and announces AlF's identify and purpose. If there
is no response after a reasonable period and the door is locked or fortified,
one or two agents breach the door using a ram or other tool to gain entry to
the premise. Teams carrying body bunkers then quickly enter and search the
premise to locate suspects and clear the premise of any danger.

See United States General Accounting Office, REPORT, Use of Force, at 60,

16
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 17 of 236

https://www.gao.gov/assets/ggd-96-l 7.pdf

82. This description matches the Arkansas ATF field office's Operations Plan

for a "limited penetration" in executing its warrant at the Malinowski home.

83. Despite knowing that Bryan did not pose a danger to them and believing that

he would cooperate, ATF agents planned for a dynamic entry, approaching the Malinowski

home wearing tactical gear, including ballistic vests and tactical helmets.

84. Most were armed with semi-automatic Colt M4 carbine rifles chambered in

5.56 caliber-a common weapon used by the U.S. military. They also possessed 9mm

handguns. One agent carried a battering ram, another carried a ballistic shield, and another

had a Halligan pry tool.

85. The agents and TFOs decided to approach the home stealthily and under the

cover of darkness and planned to cover the home's video doorbell to obscure their presence.

86. The agents chose to prepare for and execute a dynamic entry despite the

Malinowski search warrant execution not posing a threat of violence or evidence

destruction.

E. Agents Call Off a Planned Raid on March 12, 2024, When They Learn Bryan
is Out of Town

87. Agents had originally prepared to execute the search warrant on March 12,

2024, a week prior to the actual execution and raid on the Malinowski home.

88. Agents, TFOs, and LRPD officers assembled in the pre-dawn hours in the

parking lot of a Walmart located at 19301 Cantrell Rd., approximately 1.5 miles from the

Malinowski home.

17
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 18 of 236

89. They used the Walmart parking lot as a staging area to congregate before

executing the search warrant.

90. However, a law enforcement officer who was surveilling the Malinowski

home notified the search warrant team that he had observed Bryan leave his home prior to

6:00 a.m., so they did not execute the warrant.

91. Bryan had left his home early that morning to take a flight to Washington,

D.C. for work.

92. Nothing prevented the agents from executing the search warrant on March

12, 2024.

93. Because Bryan was not at home when the agents intended to execute the

search warrant, they aborted its execution.

94. Agents Dillard, Boles, and Merrill decided to delay the execution of the

search warrant until they could be assured Bryan would be present.

F. ATF Fails to Comply with the Operations Plan in Preparing for the Second
Attempt at the Search Warrant Execution

95. Agent Dillard set a new date for th~ warrant execution, March 19, 2024, and

prepared an Operations Plan on March 15, 2024, which SAC Merrill approved that day.

96. After the aborted attempt a week prior, some of the agents assigned to the

warrant execution changed. For example, the person assigned to "knock and announce"

changed from TFO Robert Bell to Matt Sprinkles after Bell was unavailable March 19,

2024.

97. The Operations Plan specifically called for the team to conduct a briefing on

18
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 19 of 236

March 18, 2024, the day before execution of the warrant. That briefing did not occur,

despite the personnel changes from the original planned execution.

98. Instead, the agents, TFOs, and LRPD officers were briefed at the nearby

Walmart staging area just prior to executing the search warrant. It was at this briefing that

they were assigned their roles and responsibilities.

99. According to Entry Team Leader Agent Tim Boles in his interview with the

Arkansas State Police two days after the shooting:

We didn't really have a brief, another sit down brief at the

office like we did [the week] before. We all met at the Walmart
on Chenal, and got everybody together. Kind of went through
a few things. I made the assignments. I told them that we were
going t~told the team we were going to do a limited •
penetration on the house if nobody came to the door, ifwe had
to breach the door. That was pretty much it for the brief.

100. Agent Boles assigned specific tasks to certain people the morning of the raid,

and recalled to Arkansas State Police that "other than a few other things, that's all I can

think of as far as what we were briefing on here in the parking lot."

G. The "Team" Assembles and Divides Up Responsibilities for the Warrant

Execution

101. On March 19, 2024, the team, consisting of a total of thirteen (13) agents,

task force officers, and LRPD officers, reassembled in the Walmart parking lot in

preparation for executing the search warrant on the Malinowski home.

102. Special Agent Merrill was the Resident Agent in Charge ("RAC") of the

Little Rock Field Office. He was responsible for supervising all criminal investigations at

the Little Rock field office, and he supervised Agent Dillard's investigation of Bryan

19
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 20 of 236

Malinowski. On the morning of March 19, 2024, Agent Merrill served as the on-scene

commander, and he formed part of the front perimeter with LRPD Officer Steve Woodall.

103. Special Agent Timothy Boles was the entry team leader responsible for

deciding when to initiate the knock and announce procedure, for ensuring that the knock

and announce procedure would be conducted lawfully in compliance with the Constitution

and applicable statutes, and for assigning roles and responsibilities for the team of agents

forcing entry into the Malinowski home.

I 04. Agent Boles ordered the initiation of the knock procedures, ordered the entry

team to break the doors to the home, and ordered his agents to enter the home after they

hesitated.

1OS. ATF Agent Adam Bass was the first agent in the entry team "stack" as it

approached the Malinowski front porch. He placed tape over the video doorbell at the front

door of the home, preventing any occupant from observing their presence-a practice

commonly used in high-risk, dynamic entries where surprise and concealment are the goal.

I 06. Bass was the agent who carried the ballistic shield and discarded it on the

front porch of the home before the agents breached the front doors. In the event of a forced

entry, he was supposed to be first in the home, leading the team with his ballistic shield

emblazed with large, unobstructed "POLICE" across the front. Agent Bass and the shield

never made it into the home before agents shot and killed Bryan.

107. ATF Agent Matthew Sprinkles was responsible for conducting the "knock

and announce" procedure.

108. Based on the operations plan, Agent Sprinkles was supposed to be the second

20
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 21 of 236

agent to enter the home, which would have placed him behind Agent Bass who had the

shield. Instead, he entered first amid the disorganization and hesitation pursuant to Agent

Boles' order.

109. Agent Tyler Cowart was a member of the entry team, and in the event of a

forced entry was responsible for using a Halligan pry tool to force open the glass, French-

style storm doors protecting the main, wooden doors on the front porch.

110. Agent Cowart expected to be approximately the fourth agent to enter the

home during a forced entry, but unexpectedly found himself as the second agent to enter

the home.

111. Task Force Officer ("TFO") Michael Gibbons was assigned to carry the ram,

which, in the event of a forced entry, would be used to break down the front, wooden doors

of the home.

112. Agent Troy Dillard, who was the agent in charge of the investigation, was

also a member of the entry team. He was positioned near the back of the "stack" as it

approached the Malinowski home.

113. Task Force Officer ("TFO") Chris Griggs was the final member of the seven-

man entry team.

114. Agents Shannon Hicks and Amy Ness walked around to the back of the home

and formed the rear perimeter.

115. Several Little Rock Police Department ("LRPD") officers assisted the A1F.

116. Officer Steve Woodall was originally assigned to be on the entry team, but

based on the recommendation of his supervisor at LRPD, was taken off the entry team and

21
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 22 of 236

instead stood with RAC Merrill as part of the.front perimeter.

117. LRPD Officer Olen Lakey parked in front of the home, facing a neighbor's

house. Upon Agent Boles' command to initiate, Officer Lakey turned on his flashing lights

and bumped his car's siren for approximately 1.5 seconds.

118. Little Rock Police Department Officer Clint Williams parked his vehicle at

the top of the cul-de-sac and was responsible for keeping any non-law enforcement

personnel from entering the cul-de-sac.

119. According to the Operations Plan, all agents, TFOs, and LRPD officers had

the authority to abort the warrant execution.

H. None of the Agents, TFOs, or LRPD Officers Wore or Activated Their

Body Cameras

120. None of the agents wore body cameras, despite a three-year-old policy

initiated by the prior Administration that mandated ATF agents wear and activate body-

worn cameras (Body Worn Cameras or "BWC") when executing search warrants. DOJ

Policy, June 7, 2021, Body Worn Camera Policy,

https://www.justice.gov/archives/dag/file/l l 44936-0/dl?inline=.

121. None of the officers on scene who were equipped with body cameras

activated their body worn cameras either, despite a 2022 policy that called for all 1FOs

detailed to the ATF to wear body-worn cameras when engaged in federal law enforcement

operations. ATF POLICY, June 2, 2022, Task Force Officer Body-Worn Camera,

https://www.atf.gov/file/l 70136/download.

122. None of the LRPD unifonned Officers manually activated their body

22
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 23 of 236

cameras, despite LRPD's General Order 316, dated December 27, 2022, that LRPD

officers "must activate his or her MVR [mobile video recording]/BWC [body worn

camera]" during "the execution of search warrants ... [and] forced entries ... " and continue

recording until the event has concluded.

123. But an audio record exists. When LRPD Officer Lakey initiated his lights

and bumped his siren, his MVR and the audio from his BWC-by design-automatically

started recording.3

I. The Agents' and TFOs' Clothing Did Not Identify Them From the Side

124. On the morning of March 19, 2024, the ATF agents and TFOs on the entry

team were all similarly dressed. They wore dark blue long-sleeved shirts, and any law

enforcement insignia or identification on the front and back of their shirts were mostly or

completely covered by their bullet proof vests.

125. Any markings on the front of agents' vests that could have identified them

as law enforcement were obscured by equipment strung across the chest and by the agents'

arms and rifles, which were held in front of their bodies.

126. Toe agents wore tactical helmets without identifying insignia.

127. The rifles they carried were black and did not display any identifying

markings.

128. The shield that Agent Bass carried was the largest, most obvious, and only

3 Though Lakey's vehicle faced a neighbor's home, the audio from his MVR allowed for an
unbiased review and accurate timeline of ATF's actions.

23
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 24 of 236

unobscured method of identifying the agents as law enforcement because of the large

"POLICE" lettering on its front. Additionally, the ballistic shield in and of itself is an

indication of law enforcement presence because, due to its size and weight, it is impractical

and uncommon for private citizens to possess one.

129. However, as noted further in this Complaint, the entry team fell into disarray

and the shield never made it into the home before Bryan was shot in the head.

130. The agents' clothing and equipment failed to present any identifying words,

emblems, or markings on their shoulders or sides.

131. Any identification, if it was not otherwise obscured, was not visible to any

person standing to the left or right of the agents.

J. The Agents Arrive in Darkness to a Quiet Home

132. When the agents arrived at the Malinowski home before sunrise on March

19, 2024, their ten (10) vehicle caravan occupied the entirety of the cul-de-sac on Durance

Court.

133. It was still completely dark outside when agents arrived before 6:00 a.m.

134. Agents, TFOs, and officers did not encounter any person or observe any

indication that someone was alerted to their presence. Nothing occurred prior to or during

the officers' presence outside the home that presented a danger to agents or caused alarm.

13 5. There was no cause for the entry team to deviate from the constitutional and

statutory requirement to knock and announce their identity and purpose and to wait a

reasonable time so they could be admitted entry.

136. While staged in the cul-de-sac before approaching the home, the agents

24
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 25 of 236

fonned a line or "stack" consisting of seven (7) agents and task force officers.

13 7. The agents maintained their stacked fonnation as they traversed the cobble-

stoned pathway from the cul-de-sac to the eight steps leading to the front-entry landing and

front doors.

138. The Malinowski home's front entry consisted of two sets of doors: a set of

French-style, glass stonn doors and the main doors behind them, which were two large

wooden doors that provided entry into the home.

139. As they did every night, the Malinowskis locked the doors before they went

to bed the prior evening and set the security system. Both sets of doors-the glass, French-

style stonn doors and the wooden main doors, remained locked at 6:00 a.m. on the morning

of March 19, 2024.

K. The Agents Hurriedly Knock and Fail to Clearly Announce

140. The entry team was aware, or at least expected, that the Malinowski home

had a video doorbell at the front door.

141. As agents approached the front door of the home, the first agent in the stack,

Agent Bass, placed a piece of painter's tape over the video doorbell camera, which was

positioned just to the right of the front doors. This action disabled the camera and concealed

the presence and identity of the armed team on the front porch.

142. When all agents were in place and the video doorbell taped, Agent Boles

gave the command to initiate the knock and announce procedure.

143. The agents never rang the doorbell. Despite having Bryan Malinowski's

phone number and noting it in their Operations Plan, no one called to notify him of their

25
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 26 of 236

presence.

144. No officer or agent attempted to announce their presence by using an

electronic public announcement (PA) system, though the Operations Plan provided that a

PA system would be used to announce their presence.

L. Agents Fail to Wait a Reasonable Time Before Breaching the

Malinowski Home and Fatally Shooting Bryan

145. At 6:02:58 a.m. on March 19, 2024, Agent Boles gave the command to

"initiate." Little Rock Officer Lakey activated his vehicle's lights and sirens and then shut

off the siren after one and a half (1.5) seconds.

146. According to ATF Agent Matt Sprinkles, the LRPD officer simply "chirped

the siren a few times."

147. According to Special Agent Hicks, Officer Lakey performed this task

"exactly like we asked him to do."

148. After the siren was silenced, the blue flashing lights remained active, but

neither the Malinowskis nor any neighbors in the Durance Court cul-de-sac saw the lights

or heard the brief bump of the siren.

149. In the subsequent investigation by the Arkansas State Police, special agents

Justin Harmon and Jimmy Collins contacted residents of two homes on the cul-de-sac, and

all stated that, although home in the pre-dawn hours of March 19, 2024, they did not hear

any sirens or see the police lights-they slept through it.

150. Arkansas State Police Major Stacie Rhoads also testified to this fact in front

of an Arkansas Senate Judiciary Committee on September 30, 2024. Arkansas Senate

26
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 27 of 236

Judiciary Committee Video, September 30, 2024,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nqFQFja4Ye4.

151. After the command to "initiate" from Commander Boles, Agent Sprinkles

began shouting and knocking on the glass of the Malinowski's outer storm doors protecting

their wooden front door.

152. Agent Amy Ness, posted in the backyard of the home, later reported to the

Arkansas State Police investigator that she could not hear any knocking or announcing

from the backyard.

153. Agent Sprinkles then paused his knocking for four seconds, before knocking

on the glass outer doors a fmal time.

154. In total, the knocking on the Malinowskis' outer glass doors lasted

approximately nineteen (19) seconds, from 6:02:58 a.m. to 6:03:17 a.m.

155. It was still dark outside, approximately an hour and ten minutes before

sunrise.

156. At 06:03:17 a.m., less than twenty seconds from when ATF agents initiated

the operation, the agents stopped knocking. At this point, the entry team ceased its

knocking and shouting.

M. In 28 Seconds, Agents Begin Forcing Their Way into the Malinowski

Home

157. Entry team leader Agent Boles stated in his interview with the Arkansas State

Police that while he could see through the angled plantation shutters into the home, he did

not see any lights turn on and did not observe any movement or hear any noises or voices

27
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 28 of 236

coming from inside the home.

158. Boles told the Arkansas State Police that "I've got a clock in my head. It's

like we're out here, we're exposed. Um, so I told them, go ahead and breach the door."

159. Boles did not check his watch or keep track of the time on a watch or other

device to measure how many seconds or minutes elapsed between the end of Agent

Sprinkles' knocking and his decision to breach the home.

160. Despite no objective indication that the entry team-as they stood on the

front porch-was in any danger, and despite no belief that the evidence inside to be seized

through the warrant was being disposed of, or any other exigency, Agent Boles ordered the

team to breach the home.

161. In less than twenty-eight (28) seconds from the time that Officer Lakey

initiated the siren bump, Agent Boles ordered his agents to break the glass doors, breach

the wooden doors, and enter the Malinowski home by force.

162. Agent Boles claimed that once he gave the command, "it was not a quick

process" because "they had to get the Halligan out," the pry tool they used to break open

the glass storm doors.

163. At 6:03:26 a.m., which was twenty-eight (28) seconds after Agent Boles'

command to "initiate," Agent Cowart began striking the Malinowskis' glass storm doors

with the Halligan tool to break them open.

164. After Agent Cowart breached the glass storm doors, TFO Gibbons used a

ram to batter the wooden front doors of the Malinowski home, causing the doors to burst

open with a loud bang upon a single strike. This strike breaching the main doors occurred

28
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 29 of 236

at 6:03:35 a.m., followed by the clattering of the ram as TFO Gibbons dropped it onto the

porch.

N. The Entry Team Falls into Disarray

165. When forced entry is made and doors are rammed open, it is protocol at the

Arkansas ATF office that agents automatically enter the home and execute a "limited

penetration." When executing a "limited penetration," the person carrying the shield enters

first.

166. In the process of breaking both sets of doors, the entry team became

disorganized. According to Agent Sprinkles, "I think we were unprepared for the French

doors."

167. When the main wooden doors were rammed open by TFO Gibbons, Agent

Sprinkles unexpectedly found himself at the front of the entry stack. As Agent Sprinkles

recalled to investigators, "I wasn't supposed to be the first entry." Agent Sprinkles stood

still waiting for Agent Bass, who carried the shield, to enter the home first.

168. As previously stated, while the Operations Plan had called for Agent Bass to

enter first utilizing the shield emblazoned with large letters identifying the agents as

"POLICE," Bass discarded the shield near the front doors and never entered with it.

169. Later, Agent Amy Ness told Arkansas State Police investigators that after the

raid, the shield was blocking the entryway of the house, and that she "cleared the doorway

of the shield for medics to come in" the house, moving it out of the way so no one tripped

on it.

170. At the moment that Agent Bass was supposed to lead the entry team in a

29
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 30 of 236

"limited penetration" with the shield, he was instead setting the shield down on the front

porch. According to the entry team leader, Agent Boles, "I didn't know that at the time."

171. Entry team leader Boles failed to heed the signs that his team had fallen into

disarray.

172. According to Agent Boles, "There was a brief hesitation [when the door

opened], which I was surprised because with our package, once the door comes open, you

go in. It was a split second, like that. And I said, 'go.' And then I don't know-you know.

All I can see is black ATF agent stuff in front ofme."

0. Two Agents Enter the Home with Guns Drawn

173. Upon the command of"Go" from Agent Boles, Agent Sprinkles entered the

home with his semi-automatic rifle drawn.

174. Agent Sprinkles had ceased his knocking and shouting twenty seconds earlier

at 6:03:17 a.m., yet as the agents pried open the glass doors and rammed into the wooden

doors to breach the home, they were silent: no one announced their identity or purpose

once the doors burst open.

175. As Agent Cowart, the second one in the door, recounted, there were no voice

commands given as agents breached the door into the Malinowskis' entryway.

176. "I didn't say anything," Cowart recalled to state police investigators, and all

he recalled Agent Sprinkles (the first agent in) saying once inside was "oh, shit."

177. Bryan Malinowski stood approximately thirty (30) feet from the front main

doors, directly to Agent Sprinkles' left.

178. The ATF and TFO agents, including Agent Sprinkles and Cowart, were

30
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 31 of 236

dressed in dark tactical gear with no lettering, insignia, or badge on the shoulder or sides

of their clothing to identify themselves from the side.

179. Neither the "POLICE" shield nor Agent Bass made it into the home before

Agent Cowart shot Bryan Malinowski in the head.

P. Bryan Malinowski Hears the Sound of Intruders and Acts to Defend

Himself and His Wife

180. Bryan and his wife Maer, in bed in their room at the back of the house, never

heard the police siren or any voices at their door.

181. Upon hearing loud banging at their front door and someone trying to get

inside, Bryan scrambled out of the bed he shared with his wife. Their bedroom sat in the

northwest corner of the house, down a hallway, past his home office, and a considerable

distance from the home's entryway.

182. Bryan quickly grabbed his handgun from the top drawer of his bedside table

and went into the closet to retrieve a magazine. Mindful of his wife's safety, Bryan

motioned for his wife to stay back, pushing her down and out of the doorway.

183. Bryan left the bedroom and moved approximately six to seven feet down a

short side hallway to gain a view of the intruders coming through his front doors.

184. Unbeknownst to Bryan, Maer refused to stay in the bedroom and followed

him down the short hallway.

185. Upon information and belief, Bryan believed intruders were breaking into his

home, and he was going to defend himself, his wife, and his home from the intruders.

186. From Bryan's vantage point about thirty feet away down the dark hallway,

31
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 32 of 236

there was no clothing or gear on the intruder that would have identified him as a law

enforcement officer.

187. Bryan had no reason to believe that the people who breached his front door

were part of a team of federal agents. He had no idea that federal agents had been following

him, investigating his fireanns sales, or looking into his paperwork and transactions-

much less that they had secured a warrant or would be executing it at his home more than

an hour before sunrise.

188. Believing they were intruders, Bryan fired his gun at the floor and hit one of

the agents in the boot sole.

189. Agent Cowart, who entered second in the stack directly behind Agent

Sprinkle, returned fire, pointing his rifle at Bryan's head and pulling the trigger several

times.

190. At 6:03:43 a.m., just 48 seconds after agents first approached his door to

cover his doorbell, Bryan Malinowski lay bleeding on the floor of his hallway, shot in the

head.

191. Several A1F agents and task force officers who subsequently entered the

Malinowski home noted that although Bryan laid on the floor with a gunshot wound to the

head, they could hear him struggling to breathe, yet offered no medical assistance because

of the nature and extent of the bullet wound.

192. The Arkansas State Police were notified about the officer-involved shooting

and responded to the Malinowski home to conduct their investigation.

193. Agent Bass noted in his subsequent interview to State Police investigators

32
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 33 of 236

that it takes "a while" to wake people up at that hour, telling investigators that after

Malinowski was shot and killed, it took some time for State Police to arrive, such that they

all "stood around outside for quite a while" because "it is 6:00, 6:30 in the morning at that

point, so it takes a while to get everybody woke up."

Q. Agents, TFOs, and Officen Detain Maer Malinowski in a Patrol Vehicle

For Hoon as She Begs to be Released

194. Maer Malinowski, who had not followed her husband's directive to stay back

in their bedroom, had instead followed him into the hallway, relaying now what was

observable from where she stood.

195. She watched helplessly as her husband was shot in the head just inches from

her. She stood by his body, screaming and crying, horrified to be covered with his blood.

196. Frozen in horror after and realizing the intruders had fatally wounded her

husband, Maer saw several dark figures at the entryway.

197. The men pointed their rifles at her and yelled at her to show them her hands.

It was only then that she realized they were law enforcement agents.

198. The agents then ordered Maer to step over her husband's limp body and allow

them to secure her.

199. The agents then escorted her to the back of an LRPD cruiser, where she was

held for the next several hours with no updates on her husband's condition.

200. At 6:00 on the morning of March 19, 2024, the temperature in Little Rock,

Arkansas was approximately thirty-four (34) degrees Fahrenheit.

201. Maer Malinowski, having been in bed when the sound of intruders breaking

33
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 34 of 236

down her front door jolted her and her husband, was only wearing a spaghetti strap tank

top and a pair of boxers (no shoes) when ATF agents removed her from her home and

placed her in the patrol vehicle.

202. ATF agents placed Maer in the back of the LRPD patrol vehicle at

approximately 6:07 a.m. She sat cold in the vehicle without any covering until she was

provided a blanket at approximately 6:51 a.m. Even after receiving the blanket, she was

still cold.

203. Maer repeatedly told the officers that she needed her clothes and medicine

and to check on her dogs, and that she needed to use the bathroom.

204. LRPD Officer Lakey and ATF agents denied Maer's requests to ride to the

hospital in the ambulance with her husband.

205. The audio from Officer Lakey's dash camera revealed Maer's desperation

during those first few frantic moments. Less than ten minutes after the shooting, LRPD

audio captured Maer recounting to the officers detaining her, what had happened:

This is ... This is a movie. It's a movie. We didn't do anything wrong. We

don't, we don't- you got...you got the wrong house. Oh, you guys got the
wrong house. We don't do anything wrong. We're honest people? Oh my
God. Oh my God. Oh my God. Oh my god! Oh! Oh! Oh, no. This is no time
for God. This is a nightmare.

When they shot my husband, I opened the door from the bedroom because
he closed it. We thought it was an intruder. So, I opened the door, he closed
it, and then I opened it again. That's when they- he got shot.

206. Nearly an hour later, Maer continued begging to be released, but officers

ignored her hysterical cries and denied her requests to be let out of the squad car:

Hear me out. Let me out! Let me out! Please hear me out. Don't. I need, I

34
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 35 of 236

need to go [unintelligible]. I need to ... Oh my love, oh my love. Oh Bryan.

Oh Bryan. You need to come [unintelligible]. You need to come. I don't
know.. .l don't know what to do without him. God, I don't know what to do.
Guide me, God. Guide me, God. Guide me. Guide me, God, please. I don't
know what to do. I don't know what to do, God. I don't know what to do. Oh
God. I don't know what to do, God. I can't- I don't know what to do. Help
me! Help me!

207. They denied her requests for clothes.

208. They denied her requests for medicine.

209. They denied her requests to go check on her dogs, assuring her that they were

in the house and accounted for. Later, she spotted one of her dogs who had escaped and

was lost nearly a mile away roaming in the neighborhood near a busy four-lane road.

210. They denied her requests to use the bathroom at her neighbor's home.

211. They held her for hours while she cried hysterically, repeatedly asking for an

explanation.

212. At approximately 7:20 am., ATF relented to her requests to use the

bathroom. Agents and officers decided that Maer could use the restroom at a nearby fire

station. However, they kept Maer in custody.

213. Officer Gladina Harris with LRPD arrived at the Malinowski home around

7:20am. Officer Harris was equipped with a body camera and dash camera, and she

activated both.

214. Officer Harris drove Maer to a nearby Little Rock Fire Department station

nearly three (3) miles from her home.

215. At the fire station, Officer Harris left Maer in the back seat of the police

patrol vehicle while she first contacted a firefighter at the front door. Officer Harris notified

35
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 36 of 236

the firefighter that she had "a prisoner" that needed to use the restroom because "her whole

house is a crime scene."

216. Maer Malinowski was still bare-footed and clad only in a tank top and boxers.

Maer pulled the blanket over her shoulders to cover her body and legs as she entered the

fire station. Officer Harris told one of the firefighters that Maer "barely had any clothes

on."

217. When Maer walked into the fire station, one man held the door for her and

Officer Harris. Three other men and a woman stood near the bathroom staring at Maer as

she walked through the front door and into the bathroom.

218. When Maer entered the bathroom, Officer Harris entered with her,

exclaiming, "I have to go in there with you." Officer Harris did not disable her body camera

while Maer used the restroom in front of her, and her body worn camera captured the audio

of Maer using the bathroom.

219. That audio was later produced as part of the body camera footage in response

to a FOIA request.

220. Officer Harris then escorted Maer to the back seat of the patrol vehicle and

drove her back to her cul-de-sac, where Maer remained in custody until after she provided

an interview to the State Police.

221. For more than three (3) hours after her husband was shot, Maer Malinowski

was hel4 in custody by LRPD officers at the direction of ATF agents.

222. At approximately 9:15 a.m., agents turned Maer over to the Arkansas State

Police so that they could interview her.

36
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 37 of 236

223. For several hours after Bryan was shot, the Malinowski home was secured,

but not searched. During this time, ATF decided the Arkansas ATF team involved in that

morning's raid would not conduct the search warrant.

224. SAC Merrill contacted the ATF office in Mississippi, which sent its agents

to Little Rock to search the Malinowski home.

22S. Additionally, the Arkansas State Police obtained a search warrant for the

home as part of their officer-involved shooting investigation. The State Police did not turn

over the Malinowski home to the ATF and RAC Merrill until 1:S3 p.m. on March 19, 2024.

226. ATF agents did not begin to search the Malinowski home pursuant to the

original warrant until after it was turned over to them that afternoon.

R. Bryan Succumbs to His Gunshot Wound and is Pronounced Dead on

March 21, 2024

227. After the ambulance arrived, Bryan Malinowski was taken to Baptist Medical

Center in Little Rock, Arkansas.

228. Maer Malinowski, finally released by officers several hours later, arrived at

the hospital to find her husband in such dire condition that her family friend and neighbor

told her not to go in the room and see him.

229. Despite medical efforts, Bryan succumbed to his injuries two days later and

was officially pronounced dead on March 21, 2024. He was S3.

230. Bryan received Last Rites by the family's priest at Maer's request.

231. In accordance with his wishes, five of his organs, including his liver and

lungs, were retrieved and donated to save the lives of others.

37
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 38 of 236

232. PlaintiffMaer Malinowski has been in continuous counseling since the event.

S. The Constitution Requires Officers to Knock and Announce and Wait a

Reasonable Time Before Forcing Entry Where No Exigency Exists

233. In Wilson v. Arkansas, the Supreme Court held that the "common-law 'knock

and announce' principle forms a part of the reasonableness inquiry under the Fourth

Amendment." 514 U.S. 927,929 (1995).

234. The requirement to knock and announce is also codified in 18 U .S.C. § 3109,

stating that officers must give "notice of [their] authority and purpose," and must be refused

admittance before forcing entry into a home.

235. Prior to entering a home to execute a search warrant, officers must identify

themselves as law enforcement and announce their purpose to execute a search warrant.

236. This requirement has long been a fixture of the Fourth Amendment and is

intended to protect the residents' privacy and dignity that can be destroyed by a sudden

entrance.

237. More importantly, it protects "human life and limb, because an unannounced

entry may provoke violence in supposed self-defense by the surprised resident." Hudson v.

Michigan, 541 U.S. 586,594 (2006).

238. The law presumes that a resident will submit to the lawful authority of

officers and provide entry to them. Hudson, 541 U.S. at 594 (2006).

239. The knock-and-announce rule "protects those elements of privacy and

dignity that can be destroyed by a sudden entrance. It gives residents the 'opportunity to

prepare themselves for' the entry of the police. 'The brief interlude between an

38
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 39 of 236

announcement and entry with a warrant may be the opportunity that an individual has to

pull on clothes or get out of bed.' In other words, it assures the opportunity to collect

oneself before answering the door." Id. (citations omitted).

240. Absent a reasonable belief that waiting would be futile, dangerous, or would

allow for the destruction of evidence, law enforcement officers are required to wait outside

of the home until they are admitted or refused. Richards, 520 U.S. 385, 394-95 (1997). A

"reasonable belief' cannot be speculative but must be based on specific and articulable

facts. Id.

241. "An officer's delay before entering ordinarily should be long enough to

ensure that the resident has had time to hear the police knock and to answer the door." U.S.

v. Vesey, 338 F.3d 913, 915-16 (8th Cir. 2003), citing Wilson v. Arkansas, 514 U.S. 927,

931-32, 936 (1995) (holding a ten-second delay was reasonable where, unlike here, the

warrant recipients were at risk of disposing illegal drugs and officers were serving a

warrant at a "small apartment ... in the afternoon, when it was likely that any occupants

were awake").

242. As the United States Supreme Court held, the time it will take an occupant

''to get to the door," will "vary with the size of the establishment," and it could take

"perhaps ... several minutes to move through a townhouse." U.S. v. Banks, 540 U.S. 31, 40

(2003).

243. But where circumstances are not exigent, such as where a suspected drug

dealer might be disposing of drugs, as in Banks, and where police do not arrive "during the

day, when anyone inside would probably have been up and around," officers must wait a

39
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 40 of 236

sufficient time to allow the delay in responding to fairly suggest the occupants' refusal to

let them in. Banks, 540 U.S. at 40.

244. "That is why, in the case with no reason to suspect an immediate risk of

frustration or futility in waiting at all, the reasonable wait time may well be longer when

police make a forced entry, since they ought to be more certain the occupant has had time

to answer the door." Id at 41.

245. The class of offense suspected also bears on the exigency analysis. As the

Supreme Court noted, "[pJolice seeking a stolen piano may be able to spend more time to

make sure they really need the battering ram." Banks, 540 U.S. at 41.

246. "Absent exigency, the police must knock and receive an actual refusal or wait

out the time necessary to infer one." Banks, 540 U.S. 31, 43.

24 7. In September 2021, the Deputy Attorney General announced a knock and

announce requirement for federal law enforcement agencies, including A1F, ''to limit the

circumstances in which agents may seek to enter a dwelling pursuant to a warrant without

complying with the 'knock and announce' rule." DOI Press Release, Department ofJustice

Announces Department-Wide Policy on Chokeholds and 'No-Knock' Entries, Sept. 14,

2021, https://www.justice.gov/archives/opa/pr/department-justice-announces-department-

wide-policy-chokeholds-and-no-knock-entries.

248. The 2021 policy expressly incorporated the Hudson v. Michigan and U.S. v.

Banks standards, stating agents must "'knock and announce' their identity, authority and

purpose, and demand to enter," and then "must wait a reasonable amount of time based on

the totality of the circumstances to permit the occupant to open the door before making

40
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 41 of 236

entry into a dwelling." Id

249. The 2021 DOJ Policy states the only exception is where "exigent

circumstances arise at the scene such that knocking and announcing the agent's presence

would create an imminent threat of physical violence to the agent and/or another person."

Id

250. In limiting 'no knock' entries to instances where there is an imminent threat

of physical violence, the mandatory DOJ Policy noted that "it is narrower than what is

permitted by law," such that "the Department is limiting the use of higher-risk 'no knock'

entries to only those instances where physical safety is at stake at the time of entry." Id

251. Despite the lack of exigency or physical danger to police at the Malinowski

home at 6:01 a.m. on March 19, 2024, Defendants broke down the door and forcibly

entered the Malinowski home before waiting a reasonable amount of time to permit the

Malinowskis to open the door or refuse entry, or a sufficient time to infer a refusal.

T. Arkansans and Americans Are Outraged, And Congressional Leaders

Call Bryan Malinowski's Death a Senseless "Horror That Should Not Occur to Any
American"

252. Within days of Bryan's death, news spread nationally that the ATF agents

had dynamically and forcefully breached the home's doors and killed Bryan Malinowski.

253. News also spread that the agents involved were not wearing body cameras,

in violation of the then-Administration's own policy.

254. As the New York Times reported, "Bryan's death has been met with outrage

by his family, friends and gun rights supporters in Arkansas and beyond, who say the raid

on March 19 was ill-conceived, unnecessary and a shocking case of government

41
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 42 of 236

overreach." Eduardo Medina, THE NEW YORK TIMES, What Set the ATF and an Airport

Leader on the Path to a Deadly Encounter?, May 24, 2024,

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/05/24/us/bryan-malinowski-arkansas-atf-guns.html.

255. Arkansas ' United States Senators Tom Cotton and John Boozman began

their own inquiry into Bryan's death, seeking answers as to how the agents' aggressive

tactics complied with the law and ATF and DOJ's own policies.

Tom Cotton O D
@Se nTomCotton ~
The Department of Justice confirmed to me and @Jo hn Boozman last
night that the ATF agents involved in the execution of a search warrant of
the home of Bryan Malinowski weren't wearing body cameras. We will
continue to press the Department to explain how this violation of its own
policy could 've happened and to disclose the full circumstances of this
tragedy. Mr. Malinowski's family and the public have a right to a full
accounting of the facts.

2:58 PM • Apr 19, 2024 • 82.3K Views

256. Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin demanded answers and called on the

ATF to release all body camera footage. "Arkansas AG Demanding Answers, Bodycams

from ATF Over Fatal SWAT Raid," April 17, 2024, https://saf.org/arkansas-ag-

demanding-answers-bodycams-from-atf-over-fatal-swat-raid/.

257. As state lawmakers called on the ATF to release body camera footage-

before learning it did not exist-the U.S. House Judiciary Committee launched an

investigation, sending a letter to ATF demanding answers. KA TV, "House Judiciary

Committee sends letter to A TF, demands answers in Malinowski raid probe," April 22,

42
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 43 of 236

2024,https://katv.com/news/local/house-judiciary-committee-sends-letter-to-atf-demands-

answers-in-malinowski-raid-probe-republicans-clinton-airport-doj-investigation-biden-

trump-sanders.

258. As Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan put it in his letter to ATF

Director Steven Dettelbach, the "circumstances surrounding the raid, the subsequent death

of Mr. Malinowski, and recent related rulemaking by the ATF raises serious questions

about the weaponization of the agency against Americans." Ex. B, House Judiciary Letter

to ATF, April 22, 2024, available at https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-

releases/chairman-jordan-demands-details-atf-fatal-raid.

259. Chairman Jordan further noted, "The circumstances of Mr. Malinowski's

death raise questions about whether the ATF followed proper protocol during the execution

of this search warrant. Department of Justice policy and President B iden' s Executive Order

14074 requires ATF agents-including those who conducted the search warrant on March

19, 2024-to wear active body-worn cameras during the execution of a search warrant.

The Department has since confirmed to the Malinowski family that ATF agents were not

wearing body cameras during the raid, a violation of the Department policy." Ex.Bat 2.

260. As Chairman Jordan recognized, the Malinowski raid pre-dated the then-

Administration's implementation of the new regulation to restrict private firearm sales:

"In particular, ATF seeks to drastically expand the universe of Americans

who would be classified as a 'dealer' under federal law requiring them to
obtain a license to become a Federal Firearms Licensee (FFL), subjecting
them to a term of imprisonment of up to five years and a fine of up to
$250,000, or both. Mr. Malinowski exercised his Second Amendment
rights and was a firearms enthusiast. Even if, as ATF has alleged, Mr.
Malinowski violated federal law, it does not justify ATF's actions that

43
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 44 of 236

ultimately lead to the use of deadly force."

Ex.Bat 3.

261. Over the next few weeks and months, as more troubling details came to light,

state and federal lawmakers pointed out that, in the absence of any reason to believe Bryan

posed any threat to either the agents or of the destruction of evidence, ATF had a host of

less-lethal search warrant options available, including serving the warrant at Bryan's

workplace (a gun-free zone), knocking on his door during waking hours in the daylight,

pulling him over in his vehicle and serving the warrant, or notifying him of their arrival

through a "call out" via his cell phone or a bullhorn. John Besselman, Senior Legal

Instructor, FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAINING CENTER MATERIALS, "The Knock

and Announce Rule: 'Knock, Knock, Knocking on the Suspect 's Door,"

https://www.fletc.gov/sites/default/files/imported_files/training/programs/legal-

division/downloads-articles-and-faqs/research-by-subject/4th-

amendment/knockandannounce.pdf.

262. Instead, absent any reasonable basis for doing so, ATF chose the most

dangerous route possible: a predawn dynamic raid not involving members of an organized

and purpose-trained tactical unit, but random members of an investigative squad. ATF

made a baseless and reckless decision destined to wake up sleeping and unsuspecting

occupants, and otherwise created circumstances and set in motion a series of events any

reasonable officer would expect to bring about a dangerous result.

263. On May 22, 2024, the House Judiciary Select Subcommittee on the

Weaponization of the Federal Government held a hearing focused on "actions taken by the

44
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 45 of 236

bureau that erode Americans' trust in the agency," with a particular focus on the

Malinowski raid.

264. During questioning, a bipartisan group oflawmakers expressed disgust at the

ATF's actions in the case, with Rep. Gerry Connolly (D-VA) describing what happened to

Bryan Malinowski as "really a horror that should not occur to any American citizen or

American resident." Ex.Cat 48.

265. Rep. Greg Steube (R-FL) addressed Mrs. Malinowski directly, telling her,

"This whole case is outrageous to me and, Ms. Malinowski, I feel like we owe you an

apology on behalf of the American government today because ATF isn't going to give you

that apology." Ex. C. at 53.

266. Chairman Jordan closed the May 22, 2024 hearing by noting that Bryan

Malinowski's case epitomized the weaponization of government:

The ATF decided to change the definition of what an FFL-what a licensee

was from principal livelihood to someone who's earning a profit, but it's
even worse because they didn't have the definition changed and enacted
when this terrible incident happened with Mr. Malinowski. That, to me, is
the weaponization of government, unilaterally making changes without it
going through the Legislative Branch of government the way our system is
supposed to work-the checks and balances how they're supposed to work-
and in the case we're talking about so much today they hadn't even fully
made that change. They didn't even follow their own rule, for goodness sake,
and we have an American who's no longer with us because of that.

Ex.Cat 68.

267. On May 23, 2024, the Committee met for a second day of ATF oversight

hearings, during which time Chairman Jordan questioned ATF's then-Director Dettelbach

about his agency's actions in the Malinowski investigation and raid.

45
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 46 of 236

268. Chairman Jordan played for Dettelbach and the Committee a video he

described as showing "ATF agents assembling in the Walmart parking lot a week before

March 19th when they were going to execute this search warrant, again pre-dawn hours a

week before, but decided not to because they realized Mr. Malinowski wasn't home. Then,

it shows what happened a week later as they approached the Malinowski home." Ex. D at

3.

269. Chairman Jordan then asked several questions of Dettelbach: "Why did you

put the tape on the doorbell camera? Why did you cut the lights? Why didn't you wear the

body cams? What are you trying to hide?" and finally, why weren't the Little Rock police

officers who accompanied the ATF agents wearing their body worn cameras? Ex. D at 20-

21.

270. Dettelbach refused to answer.

271. Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) asked Dettelbach, "If some group of ten carloads

of people showed up and kicked in a door in the dark of night, and somebody came and

shot at them, we wouldn't be talking about somebody getting shot in the toe, we would be

talking exclusively about a planned murder of somebody, who may or may not be armed,

but who had every right to have weapons in their home, an expectation they had weapons

in their home, an expectation that they might use it." Ex. D at 28.

272. When Dettelbach again refused to answer, Rep. Issa said, "I hope they

appropriately find that in spite of qualified immunity, that you blew it badly enough that,

in fact, criminal charges should be considered." Ex. D at 28.

46
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 47 of 236

273. As Rep. Issa noted in his closing remarks, Bryan Malinowski would be alive

if it weren't for the ATF's recklessness and unreasonably dangerous actions that day:

He was killed doing what any normal citizen does when people enter their
home in the dark of night and they don't know who they are. If you had body
cameras, maybe Ms. Malinowski didn't hear right. Maybe you said "Police,"
and identified yourself. Maybe he said, "I don't care," and maybe he fired
the shots. I don't believe that, and I don't think you do either. I believe he
had every real belief that he was defending his wife and family. He fired
warning shots. A ricochet hit a police officer or an ATF agent, and you killed
him. Those are the facts. We have consistently seen there are two ATFs: The
one we need and want and deserve, and the one that plays fast and loose, like
ten cars going in deliberately with a warrant that did not entitle an arrest.
When in fact if you wanted to arrest him, it would have been reasonable to
arrest him at work and simultaneously go into his home. If you had done that,
he would be alive today and we would be talking about other things,
including whether you acted legally.

Ex. D at 29.,

CAUSES OF ACTION

274. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated and re-alleged as if fully set forth

herein.

275. At all times relevant to this count, the individual Defendants were acting

under color oflaw and within the course and scope of their employment as law enforcement

agents (or duly authorized task force members) of the ATF.

276. Despite knowing the Malinowskis were asleep at 6:00 a.m. and seeing no

movement inside the house for the precious few seconds they knocked on the outer glass

doors, and despite Mr. Malinowski having no criminal history or indications of violence,

the agents decided not to wait for even a minute before breaking down the doors and

forcibly entering the home, guns raised, in the dark pre-dawn hours of March 19, 2024.

47
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 48 of 236

They then shot and killed Mr. Malinowski-his needless death a direct result of their

recklessness and negligence.

277. Plaintiff seeks an award of compensatory and punitive damages and

declaratory relief against Defendants, individually, as listed in Counts I-IV below pursuant

to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents ofthe Federal Bureau ofNarcotics, 403 U.S. 388

(1971).

278. Plaintiff also seeks an award of compensatory damages and declaratory relief

against the United States of America, as listed in Counts V-X, below, pursuant to the

Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2671 et seq.

279. The United States of America, if a private person, would be liable for the acts

and omissions of its agents in the same manner and to the same extent as a private

individual under like circumstances under the law of the state of Arkansas, where the acts

and omissions occurred.

280. The discretionary function exemption does not apply because the ATF

agents' tortious actions violated the United States Constitution.

281. Defendants' actions as alleged herein violated Plaintiff's clearly established,

constitutionally guaranteed rights to be free from unreasonable and unlawful searches and

seizures, and to be free from the use of excessive force.

282. As a direct and proximate result of the conduct of Defendants, Bryan

Malinowski suffered physical htjury and emotional trauma when he was shot and then left

to die.

48
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 49 of 236

283. As a further direct and proximate result of Bryan's wrongful death, his

statutory beneficiaries have suffered permanent economic damages, including, but not

limited to, the benefit of the money, goods, and services that Bryan Malinowski would

have contributed to Maer and his remaining statutory beneficiaries had he lived, as well as

damages from the mental anguish suffered by Maer and the remaining statutory

beneficiaries and reasonably probable to be suffered in the future, and the loss of

consortium ofMaer.

284. Plaintiff also seeks damages for Bryan's loss of life, his inability to labor and

earn income and value of his earnings lost, funeral and burial costs, property damage, his

conscious pain and suffering prior to his death, medical expenses attributable to his injuries,

and other expenses incurred and expected to be incurred in the future.

285. In addition to her mental anguish due to the wrongful death of her husband,

Plaintiff suffered and will continue to suffer, emotional pain and suffering due to her

personal experience in witnessing the violent, unconstitutional invasion of her home and

her unlawful detainment in her cul-de-sac, where she was exposed to the public strutiny of

others, for three hours, during which she begged, but was refused, to be released and to

attend to her husband, was denied requests for clothes, was denied requests for medicine,

was denied requests to check on her dogs, was denied her request to use the bathroom in

her neighbor's home but, instead, after one and a half hours, was taken to a nearby fire

deparment where the officer referred to and treated her as a "prisoner," for which she may

recover economic and compensatory damages in amounts to be determined by the

factfinder.

49
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 50 of 236

286. Plaintiff also asserts a claim for damage to her home and personal property,

, which occurred as a result of Defendants' conduct. Defendants' conduct was grossly

negligent, reckless, malicious, willful, wanton, and conducted with a flagrant indifference

for the value of human life with a subjective awareness of the risk that those within the

residence would be seriously injured or killed, for which Plaintiff seeks punitive damages

to the extent allowable by law.

\
COUNT I: FAILURE TO KNOCK AND ANNOUNCE
BIVENS V. SIX UNKNOWN NAMED AGENTS OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF NARCOTICS,
403 U.S. 388 (1971)

(Against the Individual Defendants)

287. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated and re-alleged as if fully set forth

herein.

288. Without prior notice to Plaintiff of their presence or intent, Defendants used

a show of force to enter onto the Malinowskis' property and into their domicile without

sufficiently knocking and announcing their presence and purpose and without waiting a

reasonable time before forcing entry as the law requires.

289. Defendants violated Maer and Bryan Malinowski's Fourth Amendment

rights to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures when they failed to adequately

knock and announce their presence and purpose at the Malinowskis' front door and wait a

reasonable time before forcing entry.

290. Federal law enforcement officers executing a search warrant violate the

Fourth Amendment and are subject to civil liability through a Bivens action when they

enter a home before waiting a reasonable time to be admitted or refused, absent a

50
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 51 of 236

reasonable belief that waiting would be futile, dangerous, or would allow for the

destruction of evidence. Richards, 520 U.S. 385, 394-95 (1997)

291. Defendants' brief, 11-13 seconds ofknocking on outer glass storm doors and

yelling at the entry of the Malinowskis' large home in the predawn hours, was insufficient

to provide Plaintiff and Bryan Malinowski notice of their identity, presence, and purpose

and deprived him of sufficient time to get to the door. See U.S. v. Vesey, 338 F.3d at 915-

16 (8th Cir. 2003).

292. Defendants' conduct was done with reckless indifference or malice to Maer

and Bryan Malinowski's federally protected rights.

293. As a proximate result of the Defendants' conduct, Bryan Malinowski was

shot, suffered traumatic physical injury and severe pain, was hospitalized, lost bodily

function, and suffered until he died, resulting in his wife and statutory beneficiaries

continuing to suffer ongoing pain, emotional distress, and past and present economic loss.

COUNT II: UNLAWFUL ENTRY

BIVENS V. SIX UNKNOWN NAMED AGENTS OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF NARCOTICS,
403 U.S. 388 (1971)

{Against the Individual Defendants)

294. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated and re-alleged as if fully set forth

herein.

295. Defendants' forced entry into the Malinowski residence less than one minute

after they began knocking in the predawn hours was not reasonable.

296. Defendants had no reasonable belief, based upon the totality of facts and

circumstances, to believe that the Malinowskis had refused them entry, nor was any

51
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 52 of 236

exigency present to justify failing to wait a reasonable time after knocking and announcing

their presence.

297. Despite this, Defendants forcefully entered the Malinowski home without

any legal right or justification and with a wholly unjustified degree of urgency and

militaristic tactics, given the circumstances.

298. Federal law enforcement officers executing a search warrant violate the

Fourth Amendment and are subject to civil liability through a Bivens action when they

enter a home without being denied entry (or waiting a reasonable time to infer denial of

entry) and without exigent circumstances. Hudson v. Michigan, 547 U.S. 586, 58 (2006).

299. Defendants' violation of the Malinowskis' Fourth Amendment rights was

willful, egregious, and done with malice and deliberate indifference to their clearly

established constitutional rights.

300. As a proximate result of the Defendants' conduct, Bryan Malinowski was

shot, suffered traumatic physical injury and severe pain, was hospitalized, lost bodily

function, and suffered until he died, resulting in his wife and statutory beneficiaries

continuing to suffer ongoing pain, emotional distress, and past and present economic loss.

30 I. Plaintiff seeks an award of compensatory and punitive damages and

declaratory relief against Defendants, individually, pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown

Named Agents ofthe Federal Bureau ofNarcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), as a result of their

actions which deprived Plaintiff and her deceased husband of their constitutional rights.

52
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 53 of 236

COUNT ill: USE OF EXCESSIVE FORCE

BIVENS V. SIX UNKNOWN NA.MED AGENTS OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF NARCOTICS,
403 U.S. 388 (1971)
(Against the Individual Defendants)

302. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated and re-alleged as if fully set forth

herein.

303. Plaintiff seeks an award of compensatory and punitive damages and

declaratory relief against Defendants, individually, pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown

Named Agents ofthe Federal Bureau o/Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), as a result of their

actions which deprived Plaintiff and her deceased husband of their constitutional rights.

304. Defendants used excessive force to enter onto the Malinowskis' property and

into their domicile without waiting a reasonable time following knocking and announcing

their presence and without any reasonable basis to believe that Bryan was a threat to the

agents or TFOs.

305. Defendants violated the Malinowskis' Fourth Amendment rights to be free

from unreasonable searches and seizures when they unlawfully seized Bryan Malinowski

by shooting and killing him, when they lacked an arrest warrant and created the danger that

required him to defend himself.

306. Defendants' actions were a direct result of their unconstitutional forced entry,

which occurred in violation of Plaintiff's constitutional rights and was the proximate and

but-for cause of Bryan Malinowski's death.

307. Defendants' conduct was done with reckless indifference or malice to the

Malinowskis' federally protected rights.

53
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 54 of 236

308. As a proximate result of the Defendants' conduct, Bryan Malinowski was

shot, suffered traumatic physical injury and severe pain, was hospitalized, lost bodily

function, and suffered until he died, resulting in his wife and statutory beneficiaries

continuing to suffer ongoing pain, emotional distress, and past and present economic loss.

COUNT IV: ILLEGAL DETENTION OF MAER MALINOWSKI

BIVENS V. SIX UNKNOWN NAMED AGENTS OF THE FEDERAL BUREAU OF NARCOTICS,
403 U.S. 388 (1971)

(Against the Individual Defendants)

309. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated and re-alleged as if fully set forth

herein.

310. At all times relevant to this count, the individual Defendants were acting

under color oflaw and within the course and scope of their employment as law enforcement

agents of the ATF (or duly authorized task force members) when they seized and held Maer

Malinowski in Officer Lakey's patrol car for hours following the shooting of her husband.

311. LRPD officers who participated in the unlawful detention of Maer

Malinowski were acting at the command and direction of the ATF agents and TFOs and

detained her on behalf of the ATF.

312. An objectively reasonable law enforcement officer would know that no

probable cause existed to detain Maer Malinowski for hours after the shooting.

313. Defendants did not have a warrant for the arrest of Maer Malinowski.

314. Defendants did not have any reasonable articulable suspicion or probable

cause that Maer Malinowski had committed any crime.

54
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 55 of 236

315. Defendants did not execute the search warrant during the time---more than

three (3) hours-that they detained Maer Malinowski.

316. Maer Malinowski was not detained in her home, but exposed to the public

scrutiny of neighbors when she was detained in her cul-de-sac, and was exposed to the

public scrutiny of strangers when she was escorted into a fire station to use the restroom.

317. Pre-existing law gave the individual Defendants fair warning that their

actions violated Plaintiff's Constitutional rights.

318. Plaintiff was seized when she was placed in the patrol car and denied the

ability to leave the patrol car for hours, because "in view of all the circumstances, a

reasonable person would have believed that she was not free to leave." United States v.

Mendenhall, 446 U.S. 544,554 (1980).

319. Plaintiff is entitled to recover economic, compensatory and punitive damages

for the Constitutional deprivations she suffered at the hands of the Defendants in an amount

to be determined by the factfinder.

COUNT V: WRONGFUL DEATH

FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT

(Against the United States)

320. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated and re-alleged as if fully set forth

herein.

321. At all times relevant to this count, the individual Defendants were acting as

employees and/or agents of the United States and the ATF (or duly authorized task force

55
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 56 of 236

members) and in the course and scope of their employment and in their official capacity as

employees or agents of the United States ATF.

322. The United States of America, if a private person, would be liable for the acts

and omissions of the law enforcement officers set forth herein under the law of the state

where the acts and omissions occurred.

323. The individual defendants, on behalf of the United States, committed various

acts and omissions which would render them liable to the Plaintiff under the laws of the

state of Arkansas if performed by a private person.

324. Defendants' actions caused the wrongful death of Bryan Malinowski,

resulting in damages recoverable under Ark. Code Ann.§§ 16-62-101 and 16-62-102.

325. Bryan Malinowski's statutory beneficiaries under the Arkansas Wrongful

Death Statute are his spouse, Maer Malinowski, his parents, Richard Malinowski of

Millsboro, Delaware and Barbara Haigh of Easton, Pennsylvania, and his surviving

siblings, Lynn Sosa of Easton, Pennsylvania and Lee Mociutec of Allentown,

Pennsylvania Bryan Malinowski was also survived by one brother, Matthew Malinowski,

who died before the filing of this Complaint. Matthew Malinowski's wrongful death claim

abated upon his death. Fountain v. Chicago R.l. & P. Ry., 243 Ark. 947,422 S.W.2d 878

(1968).

326. Arkansas law entitles Plaintiff, as personal representative of Bryan's estate,

to bring this wrongful death action on behalf of the wrongful death beneficiaries and to

recover "for things such as medical bills, conscious pain and suffering, funeral expenses,

and loss-of-life damages." See Durham v. Marberry, 156 S.W.3d 242 (2004).

56
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 57 of 236

327. Damages under Arkansas wrongful-death statute include the benefit of the

money, goods and services that Bryan Malinowski would have contributed to Maer and his

remaining statutory beneficiaries had he lived, the mental anguish suffered by Maer and

the remaining statutory beneficiaries and reasonably probable to be suffered in the future,

and the loss of consortium ofMaer. AMI 2216; See Ark. Code Ann.§ 16-62-102(f).

328. In addition, Bryan Malinowski's estate is entitled to recover damages for

Bryan's loss of life, his inability to labor and earn income and value of his earnings lost,

funeral and burial costs, property damage, his conscious pain and suffering prior to his

death, medical expenses attributable to his injuries, and other expenses incurred and

expected to be incurred in the future. AMI 2216; See Ark. Code Ann. § 16-62-101.

COUNT VI: ASSAULT AND BATTERY

FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT

(Against the United States)

329. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated and re-alleged as if fully set forth

herein.

330. At all times relevant to this count, the individual Defendants were acting as

employees and/or agents of the United States and the ATF (or duly authorized task force

members) and in the course and scope of their employment and in their official capacity as

employees or agents of the United States ATF.

331. The United States of America, if a private person, would be liable for the acts

and omissions of the law enforcement officers set forth herein under the law of the state

where the acts and omissions occurred.

57
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 58 of 236

332. The individual defendants, on behalf of the United States, committed various

acts and omissions which would render them liable to the Plaintiff under the laws of the

state of Arkansas if performed by a private person.

333. All of the individual Defendant ATF and task force members who entered

the Plaintiff's home were investigative or law enforcement officers, meaning any officer

of the United States who is empowered by law to execute searches, to seize evidence, or to

make arrests for violations of Federal law.

334. As described above, the individual Defendants committed acts of assault and

battery against the Plaintiff in fatally wounding Bryan Malinowski.

335. Under Arkansas law, a defendant cannot assert a justification defense if they

are the initial aggressor. Matthews v. Rogers, 279 Ark. 328, 338 (1983). A defendant in a

civil suit for damages for assault and battery must be free from fault or carelessness. Tygart

v. Kohler, 109 S.W.3d 147, 151 (2003).

336. As described above, the individual Defendants were the initial aggressors in

carrying out the forcible, unreasonable and unlawful entry into the Malinowski home.

337. The individual Defendants' acts of assault and battery are wrongful torts

under Arkansas law. Mullins v. Helgren, 638 S.W.3d 864,872, (Ark. Ct. App. 2022).

338. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' assault and battery, Plaintiff

has suffered damages and is entitled to recover damages.

58
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 59 of 236

COUNT VII: NEGLIGENCE

FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT

{Against the United States)

339. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated and re-alleged as if fully set forth

herein.

340. At all times relevant to this count, the individual Defendants were acting

under color oflaw and within the course and scope of their employment as law enforcement

agents of the ATF (or duly appointed task force members).

341. All of the individual Defendant ATF agents who entered Plaintiff's home

were investigative or law enforcement officers, meaning any officer of the United States

who is empowered by law to execute searches, to seize evidence, or to make arrests for

violations of Federal law.

342. The individual Defendants had a duty to act with reasonable care and to abide

by the U.S. Constitution and follow the law and their own practices and procedures in

executing the warrant.

343. The individual Defendants breached this duty of care by failing to adequately

knock and announce their presence and purpose and wait a reasonable time before entry to

either be denied entry or to reasonably infer a denial, as the law requires.

344. Defendants had a duty to comply with the terms of the warrant, which

included knocking and announcing themselves prior to entering the Malinowski home and

waiting a reasonable time to be granted or denied entry before forcing down the door.

345. Defendants breached this duty.

59
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 60 of 236

346. The defensive force used by Bryan Malinowski was due to the agents'

forcible, unreasonable and unlawful entry into his home.

34 7. The Malinowskis knew, or had reason to believe, that an unlawful and

forcible entry was occurring or had occurred at the time Bryan used defensive force.

348. The Defendants, under the facts which were present at the time of their entry

into the Malinowski home, had no right to enter the home in violation of the Fourth

Amendment.

349. None of the Individual Defendant agents identified themselves upon entry

into the home, and Bryan did not know nor reasonably should have known, prior to any

use of defensive force, that the individuals in his home were law enforcement.

350. The use of deadly force on Bryan Malinowski by the Defendants was

unreasonable, excessive, and in violation of clearly established Arkansas law prohibiting

negligence.

351. Furthermore, Bryan Malinowski was entitled to use deadly force under

Arkansas' "stand your ground" law, Ark. Code Ann. §§ 5-2-607, 5-2-607, and 5-2-620

because he reasonably believed the agents were about to use unlawful deadly physical force

against him.

352. Defendants' armed, forced entry into the Malinowski home exhibited an

excessive degree of physical force under the circumstances known to the agents at the time

of entry.

353. The individual Defendants' negligent acts are wrongful torts under Arkansas

law.

60
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 61 of 236

354. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' negligence, Plaintiff has

suffered damages and is entitled to recover compensatory damages.

355. In addition, Defendants' conduct was grossly negligent, reckless, malicious,

willful, wanton, and conducted with a flagrant indifference for the value of human life with

a subjective awareness of the risk that those within the residence would be seriously injured

or killed, for which Plaintiff seeks damages.

COUNT VIII: INTENTIONAL INFLICTION OF EMOTIONAL DISTRESS

FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT

(Against the United States)

356. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated and re-alleged as if fully set forth

herein.

357. At all times relevant to this count, the individual Defendants were acting as

employees and/or agents of the United States and the ATF (or duly authorized task force

members) and in the course and scope of their employment and in their official capacity as

employees or agents of the United States ATF.

358. The United States of America, if a private person, would be liable for the acts

and omissions of the law enforcement officers set forth herein under the law of the state

where the acts and omissions occurred.

359. The individual defendants, on behalf of the United States, committed various

acts and omissions which would render them liable to the Plaintiff under the laws of the

state of Arkansas if performed by a private person.

61
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 62 of 236

360. Arkansas law provides for damages for the tort of outrage, or intentional

infliction of emotional distress, where a defendant commits extreme and outrageous

conduct. Holman v. Flores, 551 S.W.3d l, 4 (Ark. Ct. App. 2018).

361. The individual defendants intended to inflict emotional distress on Plaintiff

and her husband or knew or should have known that emotional distress was the likely result

of their conduct in breaking down the door of their home in a predawn raid when they knew

Plaintiff and her husband would be sleeping.

362. The individual defendants' conduct was extreme and outrageous and beyond

all possible bounds of decency and were the cause of Plaintiff's distress. Marlar v. Daniel,

247 S.W.3d 473,477 (Ar. 2007).

363. Finally, "the emotional distress sustained by Plaintiff was so severe that no

reasonable person could be expected to endure it." Id.

COUNT IX: ARKANSAS VICTIM OF FELONIES ACT-

MANSLAUGHTER & NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE
FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT

(Against the United States)

364. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated and re-alleged as if fully set forth

herein.

365. Arkansas law authorizes any person injured or damaged by reason of conduct

of another that would constitute a felony to file a civil action to recover damages resulting

from the conduct. Ark. Code Ann. § 16-118-107.

62
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 63 of 236

366. In Arkansas, a person commits the felony offense of manslaughter, a class B

felony, if they recklessly cause the death of another person. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-10-

104(a)(3).

367. Within Manslaughter lies the included offense of Negligent Homicide.

368. In Arkansas, a person commits the felony offense of Negligent Homicide, a

class D felony, if he or she negligently causes the death of another person by means of a

deadly weapon. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-10-105(b)(2).

369. A person is criminally liable for the conduct of another person ifhe or she is

an accomplice of that person in the commission of an offense. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-

402(2).

370. No justification defense is available-even to a law enforcement officer-

when a person "believes that the use of physical force is necessary," but the person is

"reckless or negligent either in forming that belief or in employing an excessive degree of

physical force." Ark. Code Ann.§ 5-2-614(a).

371. Additionally, a person-including a law enforcement officer-who

recklessly or negligently creates a substantial risk of injury to a third party cannot avail

themselves a justification defense. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-6 l 4(b)

372. Under Arkansas law, "the right of an individual to defend himself... in the

individual's home against harm, injury or loss by a person unlawfully entering or

attempting to enter or intrude into the home is reaffirmed as a fundamental right." Ark.

Code Ann.§ 5-2-620(a).

63
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 64 of 236

373. Furthermore, "There is a legal presumption that any force or means used to

accomplish the purpose described in subsection (a) of this section was exercised in a lawful

and necessary manner." Ark. Code Ann.§ 5-2-620(b). The legal presumption can only be

overcome by clear and convincing evidence to the contrary. Id.

374. Arkansas law provides further protections to homeowners, noting that "a

person may use deadly physical force" when in their home if that person "reasonably

believes the use of deadly physical force is necessary to prevent the commission of a ...

burglary by a trespasser." Ark. Code Ann.§ 5-2-608(b)(2).

375. Defendants' act of entering the Malinowski home with firearms drawn was

intended to produce, and did produce, the threat of bodily impact, restraint, or confinement

upon the Malinowskis. Such conduct is "physical force" as defined in Arkansas'

justification statutes in Ark. Code Ann. § 5-2-601(6), and it is considered "deadly physical

force" as defined in Ark. Code Ann.§ 5-2-601(2).

376. Defendants recklessly or negligently formed the belief that deadly physical

force was necessary-that they needed to make an armed forced entry into a peaceful home

before being denied entry. And Defendants' armed, forced entry into the Malinowski home

exhibited an excessive degree of physical force under the circumstances known to the

agents at the time of entry.

377. Defendants caused the death of Bryan Malinowski, without justification,

making them liable for Manslaughter, or in the alternative, the included offense of

Negligent Homicide, without justification.

64
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 65 of 236

378. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' actions that resulted in the

death of Bryan Malinowski, which would constitute various felonies under Arkansas law,

Plaintiff has suffered damages and is entitled to recovery.

COUNT X: ARKANSAS VICTIM OF FELONIES ACT-

BATTERY
FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT

(Against the United States)

3 79. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated and re-alleged as if fully set forth

herein.

380. In Arkansas, a person commits the offense of Battery in the Second Degree,

a class D felony, if the person recklessly causes serious physical injury to another person

by means of a deadly weapon. Ark. Code Ann. § 5-13-202(a)(3)(A).

3 81. Defendants recklessly caused serious physical injury to Bryan Malinowski

by means of a deadly weapon and under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference

to the value of human life, making them liable for battery without justification.

382. As a direct and proximate cause of Defendants' actions, Plaintiff suffered

damages and is entitled to recovery.

COUNT XI: ARKANSAS VICTIM OF FELONIES ACTION-

AGGRAVATED ASSAULT
FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT

(Against the United States)

3 83. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated and re-alleged as if fully set forth

herein.

65
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 66 of 236

384. In Arkansas, a person commits the felony offense of Aggravated Assault if

that person engages in conduct that creates a substantial danger of death or serious

physical injury to another person; or displays a fireann in such a manner that creates a

substantial danger of death or serious physical injury to another person. Ark. Code

Ann. § 5-13-204(a)(l-2). Such offense is a felony.

385. Defendants' conduct in their planned dynamic entry and their

unconstitutional, unjustifiable entry with rifles drawn created a danger of death or

serious physical injury to both Bryan and Maer Malinowski.

386. Defendants' unjustifiable shooting constitutes aggravated assault as it 1)

created a substantial danger of death or serious physical injury toward Maer

Malinowski and 2) was an unlawful display of a fireann that created a substantial

danger of death or serious physical injury to Maer Malinowski.

387. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' actions that created a

substantial danger of death or serious physical injury to both Bryan and Maer Malinowski,

for which they suffered damages, Plaintiff is entitled to recovery.

COUNT XII: ARKANSAS VICTIM OF FELONIES ACT-

CRIMINAL MISCHIEF
FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT

(Against the United States)

388. In Arkansas, a person commits the felony offense of Criminal Mischief in

the First Degree if that person purposely and without legal justification destroys or

causes damage to any property of another person; and such an offense is a felony if the

66
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 67 of 236

damage is valued at more than one thousand dollars ($1,000). Ark. Code Ann.§ 5-38-

203(b)(2-4).

389. Criminal Mischief in the Second Degree is an Included Offense of

Criminal Mischief in the First Degree.

390. In Arkansas, a person commits the felony offense of Criminal Mischief in

the Second Degree if that person recklessly destroys or damages any property of

another person; and such an offense is a felony if the damage is valued at more than

five thousand dollars ($5,000). Ark. Code Ann. § 5-38-204(b)(2).

391. Defendants purposely and without justification destroyed and caused damage

to the home and property of Bryan and Maer Malinowski, in an amount that exceeded

$5,000, making them liable for Criminal Mischief without justification.

392. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' actions that resulted in

extensive damage to the property of Bryan and Maer Malinowski, which would constitute

various felonies under Arkansas law, Plaintiff has suffered damages and is entitled to

recovery.

COUNT XIII: FALSE IMPRISONMENT OF MAER MALINOWSKI

FEDERAL TORT CLAIMS ACT

(Against the United States)

393. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated and re-alleged as if fully set forth

herein.

394. All of the individual Defendant ATF agents who participated in the detention

of Plaintiff following her husband's death were investigative or law enforcement officers,

67
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 68 of 236

meaning any officer of the United States empowered by law to execute searches, to seize

evidence, or to make arrests for violations of Federal law.

395. The individual Defendants' acts of false imprisonment and false arrest are

wrongful torts under Arkansas law, which prohibits the unlawful violation of the personal

liberty of another consisting of detention without sufficient legal authority. See Headrick

v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., 738 S.W.2d 418,420, (Ark. 1987)

396. The individual Defendants falsely arrested PlaintiffMaer Malinowski when

they detained her for hours in an LRPD patrol car, refusing her requests to leave, without

any reasonable articulable suspicion and without probable cause.

397. Defendants did not have a warrant for the arrest ofMaer Malinowski.

398. Defendants did not have any reasonable articulable suspicion or probable

cause that Maer Malinowski had committed any crime.

399. Nor were Defendants executing the search warrant during the more than three

(3) hours they detained Maer Malinowski against her will.

400. Maer Malinowski was not detained in her home, but exposed to the public

scrutiny of neighbors when she was detained in her cul-de-sac, and was exposed to the

public scrutiny of strangers when she was escorted into a fire station to use the restroom.

401. Plaintiff suffered emotional pain and suffering for which she may recover

economic and compensatory damages in amounts to be determined by the factftnder.

402. Defendants' conduct in the false imprisonment of Maer Malinowski was

grossly negligent, reckless, willful and wanton, such that malice may be inferred, and for

which Plaintiff seeks damages.

68
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 69 of 236

403. Defendant United States of America is liable for the acts of the individual

Defendants under the Federal Tort Claims Act.

NO EXCEPTIONS APPLY

404. None of Plaintiff's claims asserted herein are subject to any of the exceptions

to sovereign immunity found in 28 U.S.C. § 2680.

405. Defendant USA, including the ATF and its employees, violated its own

policies and procedures in executing the raid on the Malinowski home, and failed to

exercise due care in the execution of its duties as described herein.

406. The actions described herein do not involve discretionary functions or duties.

DAMAGES

407. The preceding paragraphs are incorporated and re-alleged as if fully set forth

herein.

408. As a direct and proximate result of the negligent conduct and failures of

Defendants, Bryan Malinowski died and Plaintiff has suffered damages.

409. By reason of the shooting and the death of Bryan Malinowski, Maer and the

remaining statutory beneficiaries of Bryan Malinowski have suffered past and future

pecuniary loss, meaning the loss of the care, maintenance, support, services, advice,

counsel, and reasonable contributions of a pecuniary value, that they, in reasonable

probability, would have received from Bryan Malinowski had he lived.

410. By reason of the shooting and the death of Bryan Malinowski, Plaintiff has

suffered past and future loss of companionship and society, meaning the loss of the positive

69
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 70 of 236

benefits flowing from the love, comfort, companionship, and society that Plaintiff, in

reasonable probability, would have received from Bryan Malinowski had he lived.

411. By reason of the shooting and the death of Bryan Malinowski, Maer and the

remaining statutory beneficiaries of Bryan Malinowski have suffered past and future

mental anguish, meaning the emotional pain, torment, and suffering experienced by

Plaintiff because of the death of Bryan Malinowski, Deceased.

412. As the personal representative of the Estate of Bryan K. Malinowski,

deceased, Plaintiff further seeks compensatory and punitive damages to the extent

allowable by law, for the physical pain and mental anguish Bryan endured from the time

he was shot until the time of his death due to the negligence of Defendants. Ark. Code Ann.

§ 16-62-101.

413. Plaintiff further seeks compensatory and punitive damages to the extent

allowable by law, for her mental anguish, emotional pain, torment and suffering caused by

her personal experience of the wrongful conduct and detention by Defendants.

PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully prays and demands verdict and judgment as

follows:

a. That summons and process issue and the Defendant be served with this

Complaint as required by law and that Defendant be required to appear and

answer;

70
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 71 of 236

b. That Plaintiff's claims under the Federal Torts Claims Act against the

Defendant United States of America be tried to a judge sitting as the fact

finder;

c. That Plaintiff be awarded the damages sought herein in an amount

determined by the trier of fact;

a. That Plaintiff be awarded punitive damages against the individual

Defendants in an amount to be determined to deter each Defendant and others

from similar misconduct in the future;

b. That Plaintiff be awarded Plaintiff reasonable attorney's fees, expenses and

costs of litigation pursuant to applicable state and federal laws;

c. That Plaintiff be awarded pre and post-judgment interest; and

d. For such other relief as this Court deems just and proper.

JURY DEMAND

Plaintiff demands a jury trial on all issues so triable.

71
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 72 of 236

Dated: May 15, 2025 Respectfully submitted,

LAW OFFICES OF BUD GRAVES GARRETT GREIM LLC

C~S,P~.
Isl Nathan F. Garrett
~f'~ Nathan F. Garrett*
Bud Cummins, AR. No. 89010 Lucinda H. Luetkemeyer*
1818 N. Taylor St., No. 301 1100 Main Street
Little Rock, Arkansas 72207 Suite 2700
501-831-6125 Kansas City, Missouri 64105
[email protected] Tel: (816) 256-3181
[email protected]
[email protected]

*pro hac vice forthcoming

JAMES & CARTER, P.L.C. APPELLATE SOLUTIONS, PLLC d/bla
Isl Paul James RIORDAN LAW FIRM
Paul James, AR. No. 83091 Isl Deborah Truby__ Riordan
Matt Stauffer, AR. No. 2012284 Deborah Truby Riordan, AR No. 93231
100 River Bluff Dr., Suite 420 1501 N. University Ave., Suite 310
Little Rock, Arkansas 72202 Little Rock, Arkansas 72207
(501) 372-1414 (501) 235-8235
[email protected] [email protected]
matt(@staufferfirm.com

72
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 73 of 236

EXHIBIT A
Probate Order
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 74 of 236
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
Pulaski County Circuit Court
Terri Hollingsworth. Circuit/County Clerk
2024-Apr-12 15:14:10
60PR-24-812
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF PULASKI COUNTY, ARKA ,...,......__c_o_6_D1_2_:_3_P....;ag:a...e_s_.....
PROBATE DIVISION

IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF

BRYAN K. MALINOWSKI, DECEASED CASE NO.- - - - -

ORDER GRANTING PROBATE OF WILL AND

APPOINTMENT OF PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE

On this date there is presented to the Court the petition of Maria S. Malinowski for the
probate of the Last Will and Testament of Bryan K. Malinowski, deceased, and for the appointment
of an Executrix of the decedent's estate, and from such petition and other evidence in support
thereof the Court finds:

1. That the decedent, Bryan K. Malinowski, age 53 years, who resided at 4 Durance Court,
Pulaski County, Arkansas, died in Pulaski County, Arkansas, on or about March 21, 2024.

2. This Court has jurisdiction and venue properly lies in this county.

3. That a written instrument dated January 8, 2010, has been duly offered and proven as
the Last Will and Testament of said decedent (the "Will").

4. That the instrument offered for probate was executed in all respects according to law
when the decedent was competent to do so and acting without undue influence, fraud or restraint
and has not been revoked.

5. That the Will of the decedent nominates Maria S. Malinowski to serve as Executrix of
the estate without bond.

6. The proffered Will of Bryan K. Malinowski, deceased, should be admitted to probate

and letters testamentary should be issued to Maria S. Malinowski acting as executor of the estate.

7. There is necessity for administration upon the estate of the decedent.

8. No demand for notice of proceedings to probate the decedent's Will or for the
appointment of a personal representative of the estate has been filed herein, and the petition is not
opposed by any known person and the same may be heard and decided forthwith.

IT IS, THEREFORE, CONSIDERED, ORDERED and DECREED that the proffered

instrument be and the same hereby is admitted to probate as the Last Will of the decedent; that
Maria S. Malinowski be and hereby is appointed personal representative without bond; that letters
testamentary shall be issued to said executor by the clerk of this Court and administration on the
estate of the decedent commenced.
DATED this _ _ _ day of _ _ _ _ , 2024.

Circuit Judge
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 75 of 236

Approved as to form:

McDaniel Wolff, PLLC

Vincent M. Ward (Ark. Bar# 2009211)
1307 W. 4th Street
Little Rock, AR 72201
Ph: (501) 954-8000
Fax: (866) 419-1601

By:
.1§1(£
VirkentM. Ward

Attorneys for Maria S. Malinowski

 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 76 of 236
.,.

BRYAN KEITH MALINOWSKI

Case Number: 60PR-24-812

Type: ORDER APPOINT PERS REPRESENT

So Ordered

Electronically signed by CBCONNORS12 on 2024-04-12 page 3 of 3

Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 77 of 236

EXHIBITB
House Judiciary Letter
to ATF (April 22, 2024)
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 78 of 236

JIM JORDAN, Ohio JERROLD NADLER, Now York

CHAIRMAN RANKING MEMBER

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS

<iongrrss of tht tinittd ~tatrs

inou.sc of 1Rcprc.smtotiocs
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
2138 RAYBURN House OFFICE BUILDING
WASHINGTON, DC 2051!H3216
(202) 225-6906
fudiclo,y.house.gov

April 22, 2024

The Honorable Steven Dettelbach

Director
Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
99 New York Ave, N.E.
Washington, DC 20226

Dear Director Dettelbach:

The Committee continues to conduct oversight of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,

Firearms, and Explosives (ATF). We write regarding the deadly pre-dawn raid conducted by
ATF in Little Rock, Arkansas, while executing a search warrant on the home of Bryan
Malinowski, a local airport executive. The circumstances surrounding the raid, the subsequent
death of Mr. Malinowski, and recent related rulemaking by the ATF raises serious questions
about the weaponization of the agency against Americans.

In the early morning hours of March 19, 2024, armed ATF agents arrived at the
Malinowski family home in at least ten vehicles to execute a search warrant. 1 According to the
warrant, the ATF alleged that Mr. Malinowski was selling firearms without a license. 2 Footage
from the Malinowskis' doorbell camera shows ATF agents approaching the house with riot
shields and subsequently disabling the camera to prevent their conduct from being recorded. 3
Upon hearing the commotion and fearful of a home intrusion, Mr. Malinowski awoke and
prepared to defend his family. 4 Mr. Malinowski encountered what he and his wife believed to be
home intruders. 5 An exchange of gunfire ensued, Mr. Malinowski was shot in the head, and he
died from his wounds two days later. 6

1 Neale Zeringue, Attorney speaks on gun show loophole explained as cause for ATF raid on home of Bryan

Malinowski, KARI< (Mar. 22, 2024).

2 Alex Kienlen, Neale Zeringue, and Ryan Tuberville, Released search warrant affidavit shows details ofATF case

against Little Rock airport executive Bryan Malinowski, KARI< (Mar. 21, 2024).
3 Austin Gelder, Attorney releases video, says airport exec killed in early morning raid likely mistook ATF agents

for intruders, ARKANSAS TIMES (Apr. 7, 2024).

4 Id
5 Id
6 Id
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 79 of 236

The Honorable Steven Dettelbach

April 22, 2024
Page 2

The circumstances of Mr. Malinowski's death raise questions about whether the ATF
followed proper protocol during the execution of this search warrant. Department of Justice
policy and President Biden's Executive Order 14074 requires ATF agents-including those who
conducted the search warrant on March 19, 2024-to wear active body-worn cameras during the
execution of a search warrant. 7 The Department has since confirmed to the Malinowski family
that ATF agents were not wearing body cameras during the raid, a violation of the Department
policy. 8

It is also unclear whether ATF agents complied with Justice Department policy on "no
knock" entries. That policy, issued on September 13, 2021 by Deputy Attorney General Monaco,
directs the A TF and other federal law enforcement agencies "to limit the circumstances in which
agents may seek to enter a dwelling pursuant to a warrant without complying with the 'knock
and announce' rule." 9 In explaining the rationale for this policy, Deputy Attorney General Lisa
Monaco noted that "because of the risk posed to both law enforcement and civilians during the
execution of 'no knock' warrants, it is important that this authority be exercised in the most
°
compelling circumstances." 1 Furthermore, Monaco directed that the use of "no knock" entries
should be restricted to instances in which an "agent has reasonable grounds to believe at the time
the warrant is sought that knocking and announcing the agent's presence would create an
imminent threat of physical violence to the agent and/or another person." 11 A TF has not
explained why it resorted to a no knock entry of Mr. Malinowski's home when it could have
peacefully executed the warrant while he was away from his residence.

ATF's pre-dawn, no-knock raid of the Malinowski home coincided with the agency's
implementation of a regulation to restrict the right to private lawful sales of firearms. 12 In
particular, A TF seeks to drastically expand the universe of Americans who would be classified
as a "dealer" under federal law requiring them to obtain a license to become a Federal Firearms
Licensee (FFL), 13 subjecting them to a term of imprisonment of up to five years and a fine of up
to $250,000, or both. 14 Mr. Malinowski exercised his Second Amendment rights and was a

7 Exec. Order No. 14074, 87 C.F.R. 32945 (2022) and Memorandum from Lisa Monaco, Deputy Attorney General,
U.S. Dep't of Justice, to Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, Drug Enforcement Administration,
Federal Bureau oflnvestigation, United States Marshals Service, Assistant Attorney General for Administration, and
Executive Office for United States Attorneys, Body-Worn Camera Policy (Jun. 7, 2021); Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, U.S. Dep't ofJustice, Special Agent Body Worn Cameras (Jun. 2, 2022).
8 Louis Casiano, Arkansas senators say Clinton airport executive killed by ATF with no bodycam: "Violation of it

own policy," N.Y. Post (Apr. 20, 2024).

9 Memorandum from Lisa Monaco, Deputy Attorney General, U.S. Dep't of Justice, to Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco,

Firearms, and Explosives, Drug Enforcement Administration, Federal Bureau oflnvestigation, Federal Bureau of
Prisons, United States Marshals Service, Office oflnspector General, Heads of Litigating Components, Executive
Office for United States Attorneys, and United States Attorneys, Chokeholds & Carotid Restraints; Knock &
Announce Requirement (Sep. 13, 2021).
10 Id at 2.
11 Idat3.
12 Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives Bureau, Definition of"Engaged in the Business" as a Dealer in

Firearms, 88 Fed. Reg. 61993 (Sep. 8, 2023) [hereinafter "ATF Rule"].

11 Id.
14 18 U.S.C. § 922(a)(l)(a); 18 U.S.C. § 924(a)(l)(D).
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 80 of 236

The Honorable Steven Dettelbach

April 22, 2024
Page 3

firearms enthusiast. Even if, as ATF has alleged, Mr. Malinowski violated federal law, it does
not justify ATF' s actions that ultimately lead to the use of deadly force.

To advance the Committee's oversight of ATF with respect to this tragedy, we request
that you produce the following documents and information:

1. All documents and communications referring or relating to the planning and execution
of the search warrant that took place at Bryan Malinowski's residence on March 19,
2024, including but not limited to:

a. An unredacted copy of the affidavit and all supporting documents of the

warrant to search Bryan Malinowski's residence on March 19, 2024;

b. All audio recordings from the execution of the search warrant that took place
at Bryan Malinowski's home on March 19, 2024;

c. All operations plans for the execution of the search warrant that took place at
Bryan Malinowski's home on March 19, 2024;

d. All documents and communications referring or relating to the ATF's failure

to follow Justice Department body camera policy during the raid on Bryan
Malinowski's home on March 19, 2024; and

e. All documents and communications between or among the ATF Little Rock
Field Office, ATF Headquarters, the Justice Department, and the U.S.
Attorney's Office for the Eastern District of Arkansas referring or relating to
the execution of the search warrant at Bryan Malinowski's residence on
March 19, 2024.

2. All documents and communications referring or relating to ATF's implementation of

the memorandum from the Deputy Attorney General dated September 13, 2021,
concerning knock and announce requirements, including but not limited to documents
sufficient to show the number of "no knock" entries performed by ATF each year since
2021 and the identities of the subjects of these warrants.

We ask that you provide this information as soon as possible but no later than 5:00 p.m. on May
6, 2024.

The House Committee on the Judiciary has jurisdiction over the Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives and federal administrative procedure pursuant to House Rule
X. If you have any questions about these requests, please contact Committee staff at (202) 225-
6906.
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 81 of 236

The Honorable Steven Dettelbach

April 22, 2024
Page 4

Thank you for your prompt attention to this matter.

cc: The Honorable Jerrold L. Nadler, Ranking Member

Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 82 of 236

EXHIBITC
House Judiciary
Hearing (May 22, 2024)
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM
AUTHENTICATE~
Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 83 of 236
U.S. GOVERNMENT
INFORMATION
GPO

HEARING ON THE WEAPONIZATION OF THE

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

HEARING
BEFORE THE

SELECT SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WEAPONIZATION

OF THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION

WEDNESDAY, MAY 22, 2024

Serial No. 118-80

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

Available via: http: I /judiciary.house.gov

U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

56-793 WASHINGTON : 2024
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 84 of 236

COMMITIEE ON THE JUDICIARY

JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Chair
DARRELL ISSA, California JERROLD NADLER, New York, Ranking
MATT GAETZ, Florida Member
ANDY BIGGS, Arizona ZOE LOFGREN, California
TOM McCLINTOCK, California SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
TOM TIFFANY, Wisconsin STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky HENRY C. "HANK" JOHNSON, JR., Georgia
CHIP ROY, Texas ADAM SCHIFF, California
DAN BISHOP, North Carolina ERIC SWALWELL, California
VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana TED LIEU, California
SCOTT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington
CLIFF BENTZ, Oregon J. LUIS CORREA, California
BEN CLINE, Virginia MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania
KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota JOE NEGUSE, Colorado
LANCE GOODEN, Texas LUCY MCBATH, Georgia
JEFF VAN DREW, New Jersey MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania
TROY NEHLS, Texas VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
BARRY MOORE, Alabama DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina
KEVIN KILEY, California CORI BUSH, Missouri
HARRIET HAGEMAN, Wyoming GLENN IVEY, Maryland
NATHANIEL MORAN, Texas BECCA BALINT, Vermont
LAUREL LEE, Florida
WESLEY HUNT, Texas
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina
Vacancy

SELECT SUBCOMMITIEE ON THE WEAPONIZATION OF THE

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT
JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Chair
DARRELLISSA,California STACEY PLASKETT, Virgin Islands,
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky Ranking Member
ELISE M. STEFANIK, New York STEPHEN LYNCH, Massachusetts
MATT GAETZ, Florida LINDA SANCHEZ, California
KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota DEBBIE WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Florida
W. GREGORY STEUBE, Florida GERRY CONNOLLY, Virginia
DAN BISHOP, North Carolina JOHN GARAMENDI, California
KAT CAMMACK, Florida SYLVIA GARCIA, Texas
HARRIET HAGEMAN, Wyoming DAN GOLDMAN, New York
WARREN DAVIDSON, Ohio JASMINE CROCKETT, Texas
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina
CHRISTOPHER HIXON, Majority Staff Director
CAROLINE NABITY, Chief Counsel for Oversight
AARON HILLER, Minority Staff Director & Chief of Staff
CHRISTINA CALCE, Minority Chief Oversight Counsel

(II)
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 85 of 236

CONTENTS

WEDNESDAY, MAY 22, 2024

OPENING STATEMENTS

Page
The Honorable Jim Jordan, Chair of the Select Subcommittee on the
Weaponization of the Federal Government from the State of Ohio ...... ..... ... ... 1
The Honorable Stacey Plaskett, Ranking Member of the Select Subcommittee
on the Weaponization of the Federal Government from the Virgin Islands ... 3
WITNESSES
Ryan M. Cleckner, former Army Ranger, Co-Founder, Gun University LLC
Oral Testimony ........ .... .................. ................... ..... ...... ...... .......... .............. ..... .. .... 7
Prepared Testimony ............................................................................................. 10
Andrew Graham, former Deputy Assistant Director (DAD), Enforcement Pro-
grams Services, ATF
Oral Testimony ........... .............. .... ........... .... ...................... ....... ..... .. .............. ..... .. 13
Prepared Testimony ... ................... ... .... ............ ... ....... ....... ......... ................ ... ....... 15
Kelly Sampson, Senior Counsel, Brady United
Oral Testimony .................................. ........... ......... ....... .... ........... ........ .. ...... ... .. .... 20
Prepared Testimony . ......................... .................... ....... ............... ........... ..... ..... .... 22
The Hon. Bud Cummins, Attorney, representing the Bryan Malinowski's fam-
ily
Oral Testimony ............ ........ .... ...... .. ........ .... ..... ..... ............ ....... .. .............. .. ... ..... .. 28
Prepared Testimony ............................................................................................. 31
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC. SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
All materials submitted for the record by the Select Subcommittee on the
Weaponization of the Federal Government are listed below ............................ 69
A search warrant from the United States District Court, Eastern District
of Arkansas, submitted by the Honorable Dan Goldman, of the Select
Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government from the
State of New York, for the record
Materials submitted by the Honorable Stacey Plaskett, Ranking Member
of the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Govern-
ment from the Virgin Islands, for the record
A letter to the Honorable Jim Jordan, Chair of the Select Subcommittee
on the Weaponization of the Federal Government from the State
of Ohio, May 21, 2024, from the U.S. Department of Justice Bureau
of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, for the record
An affidavit from the United States District Court, Eastern District of
Arkansas,Mar. 24, 2024
A letter to Detroit Gun Factory, LLC, May 5, 2022, from the U.S. Depart-
ment of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
A letter to Detroit Gun Factory, LLC, Apr. 14, 2023, from the U.S.
Department of Justice Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and
Explosives

(III)
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 86 of 236

IV
Page
Materials submitted by the Honorable Stacey Plaskett, Ranking Member
of the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Govern-
ment from the Virgin Islands, for the record-Continued
A letter to the Honorable Jim Jordan, Chair of the Select Subcommittee
on the Weaponization of the Federal Government from the State
of Ohio, and the Honorable Stacey Plaskett, Ranking Member of
the Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Gov-
ernment from the Virgin Islands, May 23, 2024, from the National
Fraternal Order of Police
A report entitled, "Report of Firearms Compliance Inspection," U.S. De-
partment of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explo-
sives
An executive summary entitled, "97Percent Annual Gun Owner Survey,"
Oct. 2023, Research Findings Executive Summary, submitted by the Honor-
able Jamine Crockett, a Member of the Select Subcommittee on the
Weaponization of the Federal Government from the State of Texas, for
the record
APPENDIX
A statement from the Honorable Sylvia Garcia, a Member of the Select
Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government from the
State of Texas, for the record
A statement from the Honorable Gerry Connolly, a Member of the Select
Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government from the
State of Virginia, for the record
QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES FOR THE RECORD
Questions and responses from Kelly Sampson, Senior Counsel, Brady United,
submitted by the Honorable Sylvia Garcia, a Member of the Select Sub-
committee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government from the State
of Texas, for the record
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 87 of 236

HEARING ON THE WEAPONIZATION OF THE

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

Wednesday, May 22, 2024

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SELECT SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE WEAPONIZATION OF THE

FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

Washington, DC

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:07 a.m., in Room

2141, Rayburn House Office Building, the Hon. Jim Jordan [Chair
of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Members present: Representatives Jordan, Issa, Gaetz, Arm-
strong, Steube, Bishop, Cammack, Hageman, Davidson, Plaskett,
Lynch, Wasserman Schultz, Connolly, Goldman, and Crockett.
Also present: Representative Hill.
Chair JORDAN. The Subcommittee will come to order.
Without objection, the Chair is authorized to declare a recess at
any time. We welcome everyone to today's Hearing on the Weapon-
ization of the ATF.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from North Dakota to
lead us in the Pledge of Allegiance.
ALL. I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of Amer-
ica, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation, under God,
indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Chair JORDAN. I thank the gentleman from North Dakota.
Without objection, the gentleman from Arkansas, Mr. Hill will be
permitted to participate in today's hearing for the purposes of in-
troducing a witness, which we will get to in just a few minutes.
The Chair now recognizes himself for an opening statement.
In June 2021, just a few months after taking office, President
Biden directed the Justice Department to adopt a zero-tolerance
policy to revoke firearms-excuse me, Federal firearms licenses
from those who committed, quote, "willful violations of the law."
That same month ATF updated its internal best practices guide
to State, quote,
ATF will, absent extraordinary circumstances, initiate proceedings to re-
voke the license of any dealer that has committed a willful regulatory viola-
tion of the Gun Control Act for specified violations.
These willful violations now include purposefully broad classifica-
tions like, quote, "falsifying documents" and "failing to maintain
(1)
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 88 of 236

2
records needed for successful firearms tracing'' and would essen-
tially allow the ATF to revoke the licenses of FFLs for simple tech-
nical and nonmaterial paperwork violations.
The ATF is zealously doing just that. The year after the zero-tol-
erance policy went into effect ATF revoked over 90 licenses, more
than any year since 2006. Last year that number jumped to 157
FFL revocations. The year before zero tolerance went into effect
there were just 40 revocations.
To be sure, the Gun Control Act authorizes the ATF to inspect
FFLs to ensure they are compliant with record keeping require-
ments and all other applicable laws and regulations. That is so the
government can ensure that there are no illegal firearms transfers
occurring, not for revoking licenses for simple paperwork violations.
We have talked to some of the affected FFLs. We have even
talked to some who beat the ATF in court and were able to keep
their license. They told us it cost over $150,000 in fees to keep
their license. There is no way the average small business can afford
that much in legal and consulting fees and ATF knows this.
The data shows this brazen scheme is working. The number of
voluntary business closures post inspection has risen sharply from
24 in 2021, to 69 in 2022, and to 80 last year. This is exactly what
the left wants.
Democrats and Joe Biden have been trying to take guns away
from Americans for years. If they can't take the FFLs away, they
are going to limit the number-if they can't take the guns away,
they're going to limit the number of places where law-abiding
Americans can go purchase their firearms.
Today we'll examine the actions by ATF that led to the untimely
and unnecessary death of Bryan Malinowski. At this time, I want
to offer my condolences to the Members of Mr. Malinowski's family.
Some of them are here with us today. We're also joined by Con-
gressman Hill, who I mentioned earlier, who represents Mr.
Malinowski and his family and has sought justice on their behalf.
In the early morning hours of March 19, 2024, armed ATF
agents arrived at the Malinowski family home in at least 10 vehi-
cles to execute a search warrant. According to the warrant, the
ATF alleged that Mr. Malinowski was selling firearms without a li-
cense.
Footage from the Malinowski's doorbell camera shows ATF
agents approaching the house with riot shields and subsequently
disabling the camera to prevent their conduct from being recorded.
On hearing the commotion and fearful of a home intrusion, Mr.
Malinowski awoke and prepared to defend his family. Mr.
Malinowski encountered what he and his wife believed to be home
intruders. An exchange of gunfire ensued. Mr. Malinowski was shot
in the head, and he died from his wounds two days later.
The circumstances of Mr. Malinowski's death raise questions
about whether the ATF followed proper protocol during the execu-
tion of this search warrant. DOJ policy and President Biden's Exec-
utive Order 14074 requires ATF agents including those who con-
ducted the search warrant on the Malinowski family home to wear
active body-worn cameras during the execution of that warrant.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 89 of 236

The department, however, has since confirmed to the Malinowski

family that ATF agents were not wearing body cameras during the
raid, a clear violation of the department policy.
It is also unclear whether ATF agents complied with Justice De-
partment policy on no-knock entries. In explaining the rationale for
this policy, Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco noted that,
quote,
Because of the risk posed to both law enforcement and civilians during the
execution of no-knock warrants it is important that this authority be exer-
cised in only the most compelling circumstances.
Furthermore, Ms. Monaco directed the use of no-knock entries
should be restricted to instances in which an agent has reasonable
grounds to believe that at the time of the warrant-that the war-
rant is sought that knocking and announcing the agents' presence
would create an imminent threat of physical violence to the agent
or to another person.
It's not clear if the raid was a no-knock encounter because, in
part, the ATF agents disabled the Malinowski's home camera. ATF
has yet to explain why it resorted to a risky predawn entry of Mr.
Malinowski's home when it could have peacefully executed the war-
rant while he was away from his residence. I think that's a huge
question.
The ATF wanted Mr. Malinowski to be home when they executed
the search warrant. We know ATF abandoned a previous attempt
to execute the search warrant when they learned Mr. Malinowski
wasn't home. They were actually primed and ready to go the week
before but didn't go because he wasn't there.
Why did they need him to be in the home as this was a search
warrant and not an arrest warrant? In fact, there were numerous
other dangerous options-less dangerous options available to the
ATF.
The ATF knew his pattern of life. They could have chosen to wait
for Mr. Malinowski to leave for work and safely approached him
after he had exited his home.
The ATF could have conducted the raid after Mr. Malinowski left
for work and had other agents meet him at his work where he was
not allowed to carry a firearm.
The ATF could have waited until he was gone and asked Ms.
Malinowski to call him back after the house was secure. ATF
agents could have given Mr. Malinowski more time to answer the
door during the knock and announce, so he knew it was the police.
Since the ATF chose to ignore their own policy, not wear body
cameras, we will never know if they gave him the 10 seconds or
60 seconds or whatever to answer the door, and tomorrow in front
of the Full Judiciary Committee Director Dettelbach will have a
chance to explain the actions of the ATF.
Today we look forward to hearing from our witnesses. I want to
thank them all for being here.
I now yield back and now recognize the Ranking Member for an
opening statement.
Ms. PLASKETT. Thank you to the Chair. Good morning and thank
you to the witnesses and others that are here and joining us at this
hearing.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 90 of 236

4
Last week after Trump insider and convicted criminal Steve
Bannon demanded that Chair Jordan do more to protect Donald
Trump and this Committee answered the call. It's no accident that
last week this Committee called as a witness a former defense at-
torney for Donald Trump in the classified documents case, Rudy
Giuliani's former lawyer and the attorney who has written and
filed Chair Jordan's amicus briefs to the Supreme Court to support
Donald Trump's many indictments.
Republicans rolled their eyes and snickered when I noted as the
Ranking Democrat on the Subcommittee that the plain goal of that
hearing was to influence the New York hush money trial against
Donald Trump.
Just so the public is clear how closely this Committee is trying
to link Donald J. Trump's criminal and civil matters and use this
Committee to act as outside defense Special Counsel, two days ago
Robert Costello, a Republican witness from last week's hearing,
was called by Donald Trump as a witness for the defense in that
very trial and used his same manic rambling testimony that he
gave in this Subcommittee.
Thankfully, now maybe the Chair and GOP Members won't con-
tinue to be blasted by Fox News and other MAGA news outlets and
blogs for not doing enough with the Committee to support the
former President.
Costello got to try out his testimony. Defense counsel thought it
was good enough to appear as a witness on the stand last week.
I know the American people don't believe that this is an appro-
priate use of the $20 million allocated to this Committee holding
six full hearings to bolster disproven lies that the government is
colluding with social media companies to target conservatives, call-
ing in an antisemitic anti-vax racist conspiracy theorist who claims
a worm ate part of his brain as a witness.
Others just spread the widely debunked fringe claims about the
Deep State or have personnel grievances from appropriate firing
from their former employers that the Committee offers them time
to air here.
This is what Republicans have made of the Committee process,
but I guess it goes along with their inability to effectively legislate
in this Congress as well.
People often wonder with my courtroom litigation background
having been a prosecuting assistant district attorney if I enjoy
these hearings.
I have to tell you every time I get a notice of a hearing for this
Committee my stomach hurts because I'm disturbed by the use of
this legislative time to prop up a failed individual, one individual-
a loser in elections, a disastrous dictatorial wannabe in governing,
a perennially bankrupt false revenue inflating con artist in busi-
ness, and a cheater in marriage even. That's who the Republicans
want us to spend our time on, supporting Donald Trump rather
than the American people.
Today we're going a step further. We are somehow having a
hearing to protect the gun lobby, to prop up Donald Trump's pro-
death agenda when more than 100 Americans die of gun violence
every day.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 91 of 236

5
We have colleagues who have lost friends, classmates, and mass
shooters. Some of us in this Congress see the scourge of illegal
guns coming across State and city lines to ravage communities
with gun violence and death of youths.
These deaths happen everywhere, haunting every corner of the
American experience, and without a robust Federal law enforce-
ment, an ATF and FBI, Americans will die at a faster rate.
I know that the Virgin Islands, my home, our Federal law en-
forcement play a critical role in combating the scourge of drugs and
guns trafficking. Without these agencies or with more guns avail-
able to bad people my region where I live and all of America will
be even more dangerous.
Families of gun violence victims have their lives ripped apart
and turned upside down in a moment. None of that is helped or
made less common occurrence when we attack and undermine the
ATF and the FBI.
Republicans on this Committee simply-it's not a matter of car-
ing about those mass victims. Families in Uvalde identified their
children by shoes because they could not identify them by the faces
that they have looked at every day.
It's easy to become desensitized in politics, but if that doesn't
hurt you, if you don't feel anything for that, God help us all. There
have already been 27 deaths from school shootings this year alone.
Almost 4,000 children and teens are shot and killed every year,
15,000 more injured. Guns are the number one cause of death and
children between the age of 1-18-the first cause of death-guns.
Not car accidents, suffocation, drowning, poisoning, and cancer.
Number one, guns, an entirely preventable death if guns were in
fact well regulated.
Instead of addressing this real problem and instead of listening
to three-quarters of gun owners-gun owners-three quarters that
support common sense gun safety laws. We're continuing with this.
They brought us here right after Police Week in furtherance of
a mission to defund and dismantle the agency trying to save our
children, save Americans from gun violence.
The ATF is a central agency dedicated to stopping the source of
gun violence. Its agents ensure the background check laws are fol-
lowed. They keep guns out of the hands of criminals.
They investigate gun crimes. They prevent mass shootings,
school shootings. They support local law enforcement and gun trac-
ing and enforcement efforts. They do the vital work we so des-
perately need.
You're going to hear today about ATF overreach and especially
about the death of Mr. Malinowski. That is a tragic loss of life.
Every loss of life is tragic. Our sympathies, all of us, I believe,
go out to the family. While an investigation is ongoing into it's in-
appropriate to draw conclusions before the results of an investiga-
tion or release.
We do know from affidavits from the court that it was alleged
that Mr. Malinowski was a mass-gun trafficker, and we know that
some of the guns he sold were used to commit crimes.
We know that ATF agents were serving a legitimate search war-
rant. Beyond that, we await the results of an investigation, and
this Committee shouldn't seek to influence that.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 92 of 236

6
Let's not be mistaken. Republicans are not here today because
they're concerned about the tragic loss of life during a police raid.
You know why I know that?
Because they have not uttered a word about a Florida deputy
shooting and killing Senior Airman Roger Fortsman in his apart-
ment just a week ago. You know why I know that? Because they
don't say anything-they don't say the name Breonna Taylor who,
in 2020, was shot and killed in her home through an inappropriate
police raid.
They don't want to talk about the gun violence impacting com-
munities or how across the country a Black American is shot and
wounded every 11 minutes.
They don't want to talk about the interstate gun trafficking
that's fueling violence in Illinois where on an average someone is
killed every six hours with a gun and where Black individuals are
38 times more likely than White individuals to die by gun homi-
cide, triple the national average.
So, while homicides dropped by 13 percent in Chicago last year
that doesn't mean that people aren't still dying. Those victims de-
serve to be more than statistics. We don't talk about that. They
don't want to talk about that.
They don't want to talk about other kinds of police raids. They
want to talk about this police raid on Mr. Malinowski because it
fits their narrative about how to dismantle the ATF. That's what
this is about.
Don?t let them fool you. They don't care, and when they do care
it's not about every American. It's only about a specific type of
American that they're concerned about those deaths because I don't
hear those other names being called by them.
Ms. Sampson, Mr. Graham-I want to thank our witnesses for
being there today. Ms. Sampson, your expertise and past experi-
ence in gun violence prevention spaces is truly impressive. I'm con-
fident it will be invaluable as we examine those issues here today.
Mr. Graham, I'd also like to thank you for your more than 37
years of public service at the ATF. I guess I will be enlightened as
to why you've begun getting paid by the very gun lobby fighting
ATF's work.
I want to thank the other witnesses. I would ask all four of you
today in your testimony answers to remember something. As we
engage in this hearing in the three or so hours we'll be sitting here
before us more than a dozen Americans will lose their lives to gun
violence.
It's a somber but necessary reminder of the gravity of what we
have discussed here today and what's really at stake.
I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentlelady yields back.
Without objection, all the opening statements will be included in
the record. I will now recognize the gentleman from Arkansas to
introduce one of our witnesses.
Mr. HILL. I thank the Chair, I thank the Ranking Member, for
the invitation today to appear before the Committee to introduce
my constituent and my friend Bud Cummins.
Bud Cummins is a prominent central Arkansas attorney. He's a
former U.S. attorney and former counsel to former Governor Mike
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 93 of 236

7
Huckabee. He's joined today, Mr. Chair, by the widow of Bryan
Malinowski, Maer, and we're glad to have her here to be witness
to this event today.
Mr. Cummins is representing the Malinowski family who are
still seeking answers from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Fire-
arms, and Explosives, after ATF agents raided their family home
in the early hours of March 19th.
This predawn raid resulted in a deadly shootout, in which, ATF
agents shot and ultimately fatally wounded Bryan Malinowski-as
I said, a friend and constituent of mine-in his own home, and
Maer Malinowski is a widow at the hands of gun violence by her
own government.
Nobody knows more about this case than Bud Cummins. I'm glad
he's here to answer the Committee's questions and help get an-
swers for the family and the American public.
Thank you, Chair Jordan, for your leadership in holding this
hearing and I hope through your efforts we can obtain well de-
served answers to what led to the tragic death of Bryan
Malinowski. Bryan's widow, family, and the public deserve a full
accounting from the ATF. I thank the Chair and I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. I thank the gentleman. I thank you for your work
in bringing this terrible situation to our attention. Thank you very
much.
We also have Mr. Andrew Graham. Mr. Graham is the founder
and CEO of Graham Industry Advisors, a veteran-owned consulting
firm that advises the firearms industry on compliance with the
Gun Control Act and the Safe Explosives Act.
He previously served as the ATF Deputy Assistant Director of
Field Operations and Deputy Assistant Director of Enforcement
Programs and Services.
Mr. Ryan Cleckner is an attorney who specializes in Federal fire-
arms law and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explo-
sives compliance. He previously served our country in the U.S.
Army where he was a ranger and sniper instructor assigned to the
First Ranger Battalion. We thank you for that service as well.
Ms. Kelly Simpson is the Director of Racial Justice and a Senior
Counsel at Brady. Her work focuses on racial justice and reducing
gun violence.
We welcome our witnesses and thank them for appearing today.
We will begin by swearing you in. Would you please rise and raise
your right hand?
Do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testi-
mony you're about to give is true and correct to the best of your
knowledge, information, and belief, so help you God?
Let the record show that each of the witnesses answered in the
affirmative. Thank you. Please be seated. Please know that your
written testimony will be entered into the record in its entirety.
Accordingly, we ask that you summarize your testimony. We will
start with Mr. Cleckner, and we will move right down the aisle.
Mr. Cleckner, you're recognized for five minutes, more or less.
STATEMENT OF RYAN M. CLECKNER
Mr. CLECKNER. Good morning, Chair Jordan, Ranking Member
Plaskett, and the Members of the Subcommittee. I'm Ryan
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 94 of 236

Cleckner. I'm an attorney specializing in Federal firearms law and

the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives compli-
ance.
I am actively involved in the firearms industry, and I help Fed-
eral firearms licenses, or FFLs, to stay compliant with Federal
laws and ATF rules and regulations either through online training
at RocketFFL, or most recently through free ATF-compliant soft-
ware I made, FFLSafe.
I'm also a former Firearms Industry Executive, a university lec-
turer, and a Special Operations Sniper. I'm here today because I'm
concerned with what I see as the overreach of the ATF when it
comes to their enforcement actions over FFLs and the current ad-
ministration's zero tolerance policy when it comes to licensee in-
spections.
The Gun Control Act of 1968 is the main body of law concerning
standard firearms and the Federal firearms licensing system and,
specifically, the GCA allows the ATF to revoke an FFL's license for
a willful violation of the law.
Originally, the GCA had no such willfulness standard but Con-
gress in 1986 amended the GCA to specifically include the willful-
ness requirement to, quote, "ensure that licenses are not revoked
for inadvertent errors or technical mistakes."
The Senate notes on that matter reference Rich v. U.S., where
the ATF was required to reissue a license absent a showing of a
willful violation because willful at that time was found to mean
purposeful and intentional behavior.
Now, the addition of willful standard by Congress is significant
because an FFL's compliance obligations are largely clerical and
technical in nature, and in some instances a mere typo could be
considered a violation of the Gun Control Act.
By requiring willfulness Congress clearly raised the standard for
revocation to only include situations in which a licensee purpose-
fully and intentionally violates the law. The administration's cur-
rent zero tolerance policy flies in the face of Congress' intent and
it's causing harm to otherwise law-abiding FFLs, and it's wasting
ATF's limited resources.
I have a client, Point Blank Firearms, an FFL in Michigan, that
is a perfect example of the harm caused by the zero-tolerance policy
and overreach by the ATF. The ATF is currently trying to revoke
their license based on an inspection that started on July 26th of
last year, and in April of this year the Acting Director of Industry
Operations for the Detroit field division provided my client with a
notice of revocation.
We elected to have a hearing on the matter and have yet to be
provided with a date. My clients, the owners of Point Blank, are
here with me now while their employees are back home unsure
about their jobs and one of the owners, a first-generation Arab
American, also owns a second FFL business with another partner
who is being denied his due process because they have to have
their inspection on hold until this inspection is finalized.
In this matter the ATF falsely claimed that my client had 308
missing firearm transaction forms. In reality, my client has zero
missing forms. Every single one has been located, matches the FBI
background check numbers, and bears the customers' signature.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 95 of 236

9
The ATF also falsely claimed that they made errors by transfer-
ring firearms more than 30 days after the background check. That
also is completely untrue. Those were probably transferred the
exact same day the background check happened.
Now, to be fair, the ATF inspectors weren't aware of the facts
during the inspection. However, when we presented all this infor-
mation and facts to the ATF, and asked them to reconsider this
revocation they denied that and are pushing forward.
I'm going to share a few facts about my client that are relevant
to understanding what type of FFL the ATF is spending all this
time, energy, and money trying to shut down.
In over the 12,000 firearms acquired by Point Blank not a single
firearm has ever been lost or stolen. Point Blank has 100 percent
accountability of the 4473s, over 11,000 of them.
Point Blank has never transferred a firearm to someone who
failed a background check. They've never failed to make, submit,
or keep a multiple sales report and not once in the approximately
300 ATF trace requests had they failed to give timely and accurate
information.
In summary, Point Blank has never engaged in any activity,
even accidentally, that would have any negative impact on public
safety. They take their role very seriously.
I think ATF's zero tolerance policy is severely misguided and is
wasting ATF's limited resources and this overzealous policy is
harming the ATF's relationship with retailers.
ATF should focus its resources on trigger pullers on the street
and not shutting down honest, hard-working, and law-abiding gun
stores.
Thanks for the opportunity to speak today. I look forward to an-
swering your questions.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Cleckner follows:]
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 96 of 236

10

TESTIMONY OF .RYAN M. CLECKNER

BEFORE·THE HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TlfE. JUDICIARY.
SIJBCOMMITTEEONTHE WEAPO'NlZA110N OFTHE FEDERAI..GO\iERNMENT
MAY22, 2024

•·HEARINOON lllE \VEAPONIZATION OPlHE FEDERALGOVl:Rl';'MENT'

Good momint;,Chainrum Jonlan. R.inking Member Plaskett and mcmlllm! of lhc Suiico!flinittc~ I am
Ryru, Cleckner. an anotncj' spei:iali>.lng in federal fin:arms ra:,v eJld B\11\:au of Altohol. Toliacco.
Fireatms,. and Explosives (ATF) complinn~c.

I am actively involval 'in1h11 fircanns indusll).· and I hcilp PC!dcral· Fircanns Licensees (FFLs) to stay
compliant with federal laws and Al'F rules nnd n:gulntions through onlinc rminirig at RockctFFI.. and.
mo!rt n:ccntly•. i co-t'rluridci! a softw:m: compnny,J!Fl,Safe; (hat provides• fi'cc Ait·complinnce.software
foe all Fi::Ls to h~lp keep them compliant I am also :i fonncr fin:arm.<- ;,,dust~' e;,,cculivc, unh>c1~ity
lccrnrcr and special opct:ilions ~nipcr.

rrun lu:rc t_odJly hoca'use .l i'un com:cm~~ ,vorh, whafl st:c as. lhe ovcr-n:ach !'ftheATF "'hen•! oomcs 1(1
the1rcnforecmcnt actions over FFLs :md rhc current administratio11's "zero tolerance'' policy wltc:n it
comes 10 licensee inspections.

Tiic Oun Comr.ol Act oM 968 (GCA) is dm main bod)' of bw concerning st:111dartJ. fircnnns :ind. d,e
E'cdcml Fiitnnns Licensing sysicm. Spccific:ill~. the GC::A allows rhc ATF io revoke an ffL'lf lio.:1ts1:. for t11
'\~illful"violntion ofO,e l:1w.l

Originally. the ClCA had no· s11cb "willliilnc!iS'' $1nndafd. Congress. ,n l 9$6, amended lite GCA 10
spccific::tlly include thu willfulness requirement '1o ensure ihat iiccn~cs are not revok1.-d for, inad,'l:ncni
ctrol'S ot tcclmieal. lllistnke:s."'

The Sen:itc nOIEs on !ht Ill/Iller iefcn:nc..-d Rich v. Ullilcd Shill:S> 38~ F. S11pji. 7.97 (SD,
Ohio I ~74) wherein the ATF wns n:quiroo to ·'reissue fal licen5eab~nt n sliowing ofwitlful viol.ition"
because willful ,,·as fout•d to t'nban r]iurp\)S6ful, intcnti<;>nal bclr.iv,ior,"

, ;su.s.C.§9231•1
• 911th Ca!tg""5!1. S@ftllP. C,,rivnft""" llll li!ti ./Udicior?, S.914 R!!pOf!
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 97 of 236

11
Thi, addition of n "willful'" stnnd,ml by Congress was siSJ1ificant bei:ause an fFL's ,compliance obligations
:m: l:IJl!ely cl.crical ""d technical in 11an11-c·11J1d. in some im,iancel', a mere iyj,o could be considered ii
,•iolalion of the GCA. By requiring '\~illfulncss;e Cong.rc.'IS clearly raised,thc st.ind.irtlfor l'C\"oc:irion to
onl~• include- siiu:nions in which a licensee purposefully and intcnrionnlly violrucs the law.

ll\cAdn1iuistrntion·s cum:nt ~ro mlerancc1• policy Oles in the· fncc of Congl'<,ss:s intcn.t. ·it is c:msiog
hnnn ·to·othcnvisc l:M-o.biding FF!.s. nlld it is w:istiog Atr-s limited resources.

£ ha,-c a clicht, Point Blank Fircnnns, nn FFl. irt Michigan, lh.,1 is :i:pcrfcct c:.~lllllplc of llic hbnn causi::d b)•
lhi~ "zero tolcr.incc"·~,olicy and over-reach by tbttATF.

11\c;ATF is cttrr~ntly tr}'ing to rc"c,ke their liccnsc b:isro on 1111 inspection th.it started on Jul~· 26tll of 1351
year. -0!1April 9th of this y~ar. 11,c nctinS Dircctor.ofhidustry Oµct:11101'1!1 (D10) for the Dcrroit field
Division 11rovided rny client with a Notice of Revocation (NOR). We elooied, to lmve.a hearfns on thll:
mam;r·and we havcl'Ci to.be provided with. a hearing date.

My tlicnts, rhc owners of Point Blank, arc, here with me now ,ihilc their cmplo~= an: b.ick home: unsurc
of d1cir jobs, And, one oftltc O\\'ncrs. a first gcncr:11io11 Amb-Amcrican; also cMns a second F.FL bnsiticss:
with another partner who is being dtniM his due process bc:c:iuse lhcy h:t,'C had thci r ,\TF insj)cction
ongoln!; foralmos\ a yC,it' nM pendici~ the 011tc6111<; ofthls comj>.iny":'$ rc,·ocation pioc:ccdir1g-,

In this matter. d1c ATF talsely da,mt:d liiar my client Md 308 ml<sing Citeann tr:u1~m:tion form,;.(4473s).
ln•n,-.ilil)~ my client h:is ~ mis~ing 44 73.s • C\-ei)• ·single one fois:becn located. ·matd1es the FBI backgtound,
cbcck numbcl'!f, and bc:irs· the CLL<lomcrs' sign:liurc.

ThcATF also falsely cl:umed that my client transfcm:d a firainn lo a cusmmermoro 'than 30 Uays :iftcc-
iruceessfully passing th~it' background check. hi n:ali~t my client tmnslffl:cd. lhC firt:1mt on rhc ,-ct:;• snmc
day'thc b:1ck~rot111d check was p.1Sscll • wcfl within (he 30 days allowed in accord:moc with the law and
ATF·rulcs llnd rcgr,1:llions.

To be fair. the ATf inspcctoll! \\tire not await: ofil)c. facts dwirt.ct 11\c inspection and the decision by ilic
ATFfo issue the Notice of !'cvocalion w:1s bnscd on theirmu;undcmanding oflhc siluation, Howcv.:r,.we,
sliowtd tltc ATF th:11 its.rcvoeation decision is b:iscd on erTl!.nco11s information, We showc~ ATF dint.there
wcro, in F.ict, no missing· fonns-nor llllc trnnsfurs. 'lnc.ro, is clcariy i10 pu.biic s::ifuty iss,e. No f'ii:cnm1s ~\/en:,
transfetTCd, without a 4473, ,Oil119ut ~ bad.:grounil check;11or to a pc:olJlbitcd pcts0n. Despite !he
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 98 of 236

12
infonnatiQII, we provided to ATF that the revoc:ition wa.~ ba.~cd on factunlly i11corrcct'nssumptions1hc ATP
rcspo11ded by dis111issing the- new infonnnlion and ccintihuing to pursue n:1>0C:1tio11.

rin going to sluuc :i few fac!l :ibout my client tha1 arerolc11an110 understand 111,at fypc o(FFL tltc ATF is•
sp1:ndinS nil of1his time, fncrg~, and nttmc~• lryin,s-to s11111 d~Wi1:

• In the over 12.0IK)fitcilfllis :icqoircd by Point 81:i:nk. not a si1ig.lc-tirc:1mi h:is ever been' losi or stolen
• Point 8fnnk has LOO% 4473 account1bili1y - over l 1,500 of 1hc1n.
• Point 81nnk has never transli:m:d a fircann lo SOfTICOllC' '"ho fnilcd a bac.llground ch.eek.
• Poiili 8lru1k h:is never fuiled to 111ake, s1ibh1it,.nor propctl)• store a mr,ltiplc handgun sales fonn, •
• Nl!l once. in ll1c·appruxim;m:ly 300 lrncc n:qums received by the ATF. has Poinl Blank ·fuifed tu
prO•idc accurat1: Riid tiin~I~• ,nfoimat'icin.

In snmmar}'. Point Blank has ife\Jllr engn.gcd in any activity. even accidenl:illy, lh:it \VOuld havcanr
nc~nrNe imp:icr_ori pliblic saf~•- Porn, Blank tnkcs Its role as an Ffl.: scl'iO\isl~nind 11ic,~ itsclfas I~
front line helping lo pre1-c1rt the-criminaracquisition offi,:c:mns.

Point Blank nas been living wilh the. t!1roat of being shut down t.lr t Omonths. Inst this wcekATF .fulsely
accused rhcm of fai_lipg to respond 'to a trace request. ·niankfully, Point Blank, keeps good rcco,;ds and was
;iblc 10 show thai: the,-: CQn,_pHcd nnd that theATF was mistnl:en, og:un.

ATF·s ~~cro-tolci':lllcc~ pQlicy i.~ misguided 1111!1 «iasrint thc.ATF'~ limitcd'resoi'rccs. This ovcrzcal_ous
po!iC)' is banning ATF's rel:uionship wiOi relailers upon 1\:hich ATF relies· lo provide infonn:dion on·
susp_icious. :tai vity.

ATF .sl\ould, focus its =•m:s on takin'g'1rigger pullers'· off the street - not shutung down honos!,'h:trd
wolking and laiv-t1bidi11g gun stores. Pongress neyer inte1i!fed for ATF 10 shut do'.vn ·FFLs for minor
cleric:ii cm)rs llmt :m: noi "willful llioiatloru<."

Thank }-bu for thc.opptimmil')•to speak here today. rm willing io answer any qucstion!lyo\1 n1:ir h:ivc;

Rynn Cicc~ner
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 99 of 236

13
Chair JORDAN. Mr. Graham, you're recognized for five minutes.
Hit that microphone if you could, Mr. Graham, so everyone can
hear you. Go right ahead.
STATEMENT OF ANDREW GRAHAM
Mr. GRAHAM. Thank you, Chair.
Good morning again, Chair Jordan, Ranking Member Plaskett,
and distinguished Members of the Select Subcommittee. My name
is Andrew Graham and I appreciate the opportunity today to ap-
pear before you and testify about an issue which has impacted my
career as a former ATF employee as well as one that truly hits
home. .
For 37 years I have proudly served in the Bureau of Alcohol, To-
bacco, and Firearms, and I am a veteran of the United States Air
Force National Guard.
As the Deputy Assistant Director I served in the capacity over
ATF's regulatory enforcement as well as Deputy Assistant Director
over the enforcement program services-that is tracing, etc.
During this time, I've worked alongside some of the most tal-
ented men and women that I've known who've done a yeoman's
work in providing safer communities, enforcing the laws and regu-
lations to uphold the Constitution.
I've developed strong relationships with our agents, field inves-
tigators, better known as IOis, as well as directors of industry op-
erations at all 25 field divisions.
Some of you find it surprising that the agents and the IOis de-
velop a rapport with FFLs or better known as retailers, but that
relationship is critical as FFLs are often the first line of defense
in linking-in keeping firearms out of the hands of prohibited peo-
ple. They share tips with ATF of suspected traffickers and/or poten-
tial straw purchasers.
I can tell you from personal experience now as a consultant that
members of the firearms industry ·do not want firearms to go into
the wrong hands and I put a lot of emphasis on that. That is a
standing. We do not want firearms to be in the hands of prohibitive
persons.
In fact, the firearms industry is one of the most heavily regulated
industries. Firearm retailers spend countless hours ensuring that
they're up to speed on current laws and regulations.
FFLs are human and the best of the retailers they do make mis-
takes. That was part of my job for 37 years is identifying these er-
rors, working to help that they aren't repeated, ensure that the
proper training was deployed, and to provide an opportunity for an
FFL to get back on track.
In the summer of 2021, President Biden announced a comprehen-
sive strategy to prevent and respond to gun crimes and ensure pub-
lic safety which included directing the ATF to revoke Federal fire-
arm dealers under a zero tolerance policy if they violate the law-
willfully violate on the following counts: (1) Transferring a firearm
to a prohibited person; (2) failing to run a background check; (3)
falsifying records such as transaction forms-those are the ATF
Form 44 73s; failing to respond to a trace request within 24 hours;
and (4) refusing to permit ATF to conduct an onsite inspection dur-
ing normal business hours.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 100 of 236

14
Revocation is the loss of a Federal firearms licensee license and
closes the business entirely. So, this is a big deal. It's not just the
loss of a license, but it's a loss of one's livelihood.
As stated by ATF in 2014, when detailing the Federal firearms
revocation process, willfulness is not defined by the regulation but
is defined by case law to mean the intentional disregard of a known
legal duty or plain indifference of the licensee's legal obligation.
In the case of an FFL who has willfully violated the law, has
shown an intentional disregard for the legal requirements or has
knowingly participated in criminal activity, revocation may be the
only viable option.
The problem is the breadth of the zero-tolerance policy is much
larger than just the rogue gun dealers. It was initially-it was sup-
posedly carried out to address willful violations being redefined on
a case-by-case basis.
With numerous enforcement complexities it strained the relation-
ship between the regulator and the industry. This is putting FFLs
who should never have been caught up in this new policy and dam-
aged the cooperative trust built between the agency as well as in-
dustry members.
It's become so rampant that FFLs facing revocations that never
would have faced them now are pressured into shutting down their
businesses and depleting funds that they, quite frankly, don't have.
In December 2022, I made the tough decision to retire from civil
service and in my time since leaving ATF I have continued to do
what I've enjoyed while I was there with ATF, working with mem-
bers of the firearms industry to ensure regulatory compliance, and
in the event that FFLs are ensnared in this new policy I help them
to navigate the process to help preserve their livelihood and their
law-abiding businesses.
Thank you for your time. I look forward to answering your ques-
tions as well.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Graham follows:]
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 101 of 236

15

Written Testimony of Andrew Graham

Founder and CEO of Graham Industry Advisor, LLC
Former ATF Deputy Assistant Director
Submitted to the U.S. Rous~ of Representatives
Committee on tbe Judiciary
Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the
Federal Government
"Hearing on the Weaponization of the 'Feder~I
Government'~
May 22, 2024

ChainnanJordan, Ranking Member Plaskett, and

distinguished members of the Select Subcommittee on the
Weaponization of the.Federal Government, my name is
Andrew Graham~ and I appreciate the opportunity to
appear before you today to testify on an issue that
impacte4 my career and truly 'hits home.

For ~7 years, I proudly served in the Bureau of Alcohol,

Tobacco, Firearms, arid 'Explosives (ATF) in a variety of
capacities and was a veteran of the USAF - National
Guard. I was the Deputy Assista.t)t Director of Field
Operations over ATF's R~gulatory Inspection Program
and the D~puty Assistant Director of Enforcement
Programs and Services.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 102 of 236

16

During that time 1 I worked alongside of some of the most

talented men and women I know,. who have don~
yeoman's work to provide for safer communities by
enforcing the laws and regulations on the books to uphold
the Constitution of the United States.

I developed strong relatiortsh\ps. not only with ATF

Special Agems, Industry Operations Investigators (IOis);
and Directors of Industry Operations (D10s) but also with
members of the firearm industry.

Some may find it surprising that ATF' agents and 101s

both develop a rapport with firearm- retailers. that
relationship is critical as FFLs are often the first line of
defense in keeping fireanns out ofthe wrong hand.s by
sharing tips with ATF on suspected illegal gun trafficking
and straw purchasing of fireanns.

I can tell you from my experie.nce, including now as a

consultant., that members of the fireann industry do not
want firearms lo land in the. wrong hands. They strive to
r~main compliant with the myriad of federal laws and
regulations.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 103 of 236

17

-3-

In fact, as one.ofthe,most regulated industries, fireanrt

retailers spend countless hours ensuring they are up to
speed on current laws and regulations.But we are all
human and even ihe best of retailers occasionally make
mistakes. That was part of my job for 3 7 years with ATF
to· identify ~rrors made, to help ensure they aten 't
repeated, to. educate retailers, and to give them the
opportunity to get b~ck into compliance ..

In the summer of 2021, President Biden announced a

"Comprehensive Strategy to Prevent and Respond to Gun
Crime and Ehsµre Public Safety," which included
directing ATF hto revoke the licen~es of dealer~ the first
time, under a Zero Tolerance Policy, th~t they vioJate-
f'ederal law by willfully I) transferring a fireann to a
prohibited person, 2) failing to run~ required background
check, 3) falsifying records~ such as a firearms transaction
fonn, 4) failing to respond to anATF trac~g request, ·or 5)
refusing to permit ATF to conduct an inspection in
violation of the law/' 1

! "Fact Sh•ct: Bidcn-tlarris Adniinistnition Announces Comprehensive ~lr.lltgy, to Ptevenr nnll Respond to Ci\Jn
Crime-and 'Easun, Puiillc Surety." Tho White House. 23 June 2021, IRllt, 11,\ wII huel1•ni«J !!Jff•l11kt'illy-
"""" -.lllim:•<111,-~tt,l'<t, !ti"! ti'\~· 1-.r.:1~l1.t14'tdC11-lu.m•·adm111t~r,e1k•tl•,Ull'lllln~-t•ttlt_rl),;lo;trf11~IM!Cl'J•ht-
rrT'\rJ]l<l!t1!-r.•~•l.t,':l!)ll-l.fJ(\1 -lffllJ-s"rl'lll~IIPfr ..,qrt,,1 ,
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 104 of 236

18

Revocation is the loss of a federal fireanns license, and

closes the business entirely; so this is a big. deal. Ies not
just the loss of a license, but the loss of livelihood. For
"Willful" violations, however, this is necessary. As stated
by ATP in 2014 when detailing the federal fireanns
license revocation process, "Willfulness is not defined -in
the regulations but is defined by case law to mean the·
intentional disregard of a known legal duty or plain
indifference. to a licensee's legal obligations·.

In the case of an FFL who has willfully violated the law,

has shown an intentional disregard for regulatory
requirements, or has knowingly participated in criminal
acts, revocation often becomes the. only viable option."2

The problem is the bre~dth of the "Zero Tolerance" policy

is much larger than the "rogue gun dealers'; that this
policy was supposedly carried out to address. With
"willful" violations being redefined on an individual case-
by-case basis, with enforcement complexities. It strained
our relationships with FFLs who should h;lVe never been
caught up in this new policy and damaged the cooperative
trust that we have built.

•··FnttS~i,ei: FF.PERAL FlP.E/\llMS LICENSE R:EVOCA1'lON PllOCE.SS.~ 13umiu ufAtcoholTobacco,

rlftllnuond Cxploii•~ Moy 201-4, Jit:r ..... ,, ,.,r,-,,.111,, 111 l/1 t!t•~,,h~~,,
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 105 of 236

19

-5-

It has become so rampant that FFLs facing revocations

that never would have faced them until now are, either
being pressured-to shut down or deplete funds they don'i
have, to prove their innocence ancl justify keeping their
doors open.

When I took the Oath of Office and joined the ATF., I

never imagined that fighting to disrupt violent crime for
safer communities entaHed weaponizing a federal agency
to lay the hammer down on the law-abiding, and it
certainly wasrt't how I envisioned my last chapter- with the
agency I've worked with for more than three decades of
ending.

In December 2022, I made the tough decision to retire

from civil service. In my time since leaving ATF, I have
continued to do what I enjoyed while there-working
with members ofthefireanns industry to ensure
regulatory comp1iance-and in the event that FFLs ate
ensnared in this new pol icy, helping them to navigate the
process to help preserve their Hvetihooa artd law-abiding
business.

I look forward to answering yQl,11" q\}eStions.

Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 106 of 236

20
Chair JORDAN. Thank you, Mr. Graham.
Ms. Sampson, you're recognized for five minutes.
STATEMENT OF KELLY SAMPSON
Ms. SAMPSON. Chair Jordan, Ranking Member Plaskett, and dis-
tinguished Members of the Select Subcommittee, thank you for in-
viting me to testify today.
I'm Kelly Sampson, Senior Counsel and Director of Racial Justice
at Brady, the oldest national gun violence organization in America.
Gun violence is a public health epidemic, causing more than
44,000 deaths each year-44,000 deaths and many more who live
with injury and trauma. Since 2020, gun violence has been the top
cause of death for American children and teens, which is why thou-
sands of kids and their parents plead for Congress to protect them.
Despite our country's love of freedom gun violence is a reason
why many Americans no longer feel free to go to school, a July 4th
parade, the movies, concerts, the grocery store, and places of wor-
ship.
Gun violence is why many of your own constituents, gun owners
and nongun owners alike, are desperate for you and your col-
leagues to pass common sense gun laws and ensure those laws are
properly implemented.
With tens of thousands dead and many more injured Congress
should be focused on ending our gun violence epidemic and equip-
ping the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, or
ATF, to meet its mandate and to enforce the Nation's gun laws.
Just days ago, Congress celebrated Police Week where members
gave countless speeches in support of law enforcement.
ATF is not only law enforcement in and of itself, but also a crit-
ical ally of State and local law enforcement agencies across the
country. ATF is the only Federal law enforcement agency which
has specific jurisdiction over firearms and gun industry oversight.
It should also be noted that guns are the leading cause of death
for police officers killed in the line of duty. Guns don't grow on
trees. Almost all firearms are sourced from illegal markets, manu-
factured, imported, distributed and sold by Federal firearms licens-
ees, or FFLs.
Generally, manufacturers and importers sell to distributors who
sell to dealers who then sell to the public. Dealers are the first line
of defense against gun trafficking and most take this responsibility
very seriously.
In fact, the large majority of gun dealers won't sell a single crime
gun in a given year. A small number of dealers' negligent practices
filter guns directly into the criminal market.
According to the last available data, nearly 70 percent of crime
guns were traced back to just over one percent of licensed dealers.
So, even though the portion of the gun industry most responsible
for supplying crime guns is miniscule, ATF nonetheless struggles
to meet its mandate.
ATF only has the resources to inspect about eight percent of ac-
tive FFLs annually, falling far short of its own internal goal of in-
specting each FFL every three years.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 107 of 236

21
To reach that goal ATF would need to more than double its cur-
rent compliance staff. In fact, over 2,000 active gun dealers have
gone for more than a decade without inspection.
ATF struggles to meet its mandates because it's been under
resourced and deprived of a confirmed director for decades. Indeed,
just this year Congress voted to once again reduce ATF's budget
despite the gun violence epidemic.
These obstructions erode ATF's oversight capacity, forcing hard-
working law enforcement agents to regulate a behemoth industry
with their arms tied behind their backs.
Undermining ATF doesn't just hinder the agency but it also
harms local law enforcement across the country. ATF plays an es-
sential role in supporting State and local law enforcement nation-
wide including in your districts.
When an incidence of gun violence occurs, ATF helps local and
State law enforcement partners by generating investigative leads
and information on guns recovered in crimes by tracing them to
their last known retail purchaser. ATF also trains officers to better
understand advanced firearms technology.
These services strengthen State and local law enforcement, pro-
viding them with information, coordination, and education nec-
essary to enforce existing laws and prevent future gun crimes.
Congress must listen to their constituents and recognize that the
American people are begging for gun violence prevention policies.
Americans, gun owners, and nongun owners want to be safe. Fed-
eral oversight for the firearm industry does not hinder any law-
abiding citizen's Second Amendment right.
Instead of attacking ATF you should be building up the agency
and supporting its efforts to end gun violence. In the shadow of Po-
lice Week, we must remember that ATF agents are law enforce-
ment, too, and they play an important role in protecting the public
and other law enforcement officers all over the country from gun
violence.
Thank you, and I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Sampson follows:]
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 108 of 236

22

BRADY *
UMttD AOAllffl GUii YIOUKCE

Kelly ~ampson; Senior Counsel ~nd Director of Racial Justice afBiady

:13efore the Select Subcommittee Oil the Weaporiit,ation·ofti1e.federa!"Govetnmen1
,¥ay 22,.2~4

lnti'Odlldion
Chainnan Jordan,,Ranklng-Membet Plaskett, and Distinguished Suh1:9miru11ee m~mbers; t thank
you for the opportunity to ·highlighi gun violence, which·indisputably threa~s Ameri(?lnS ~ch and
every ~By.
founded in 1974, Brndy wQrks across Congress,.couris, and communities to end America's g11n·
violence epidemic: Our organization· carries the name of Jim Brady, who was shot and severely injured'
in the as~ssih!llion 11ticn1~ton Pr~icient Reagan's lit'c.: jim and'his wife, Sarah, led tlie fight to pass ihe
landmark Brady Bill 30 years ago..
Oun violence .is a pulil'ic health epidcniie, leading to more' than 4il,OOO deaths annually. Since
20~0, gun viol;n'ce ~~sheen thc>tQp cau~·bf ~Iii- f~r- American" chjldren and,teen5; whiclt is why eac~
year lho_usands of kids (i11d /heir purem,,·ptead for Congress 10 pro~ect them, Despite ourc'buntty's love·
of·freedom, gun violence is the-teason why ·many Ameticans. noionger-feel' free to go to sctiool, a J~ly
4th parade, the movies, concerts,.the gr'!)CCIY store.. and places of worship. Gim violence is why many• of
your "awn:c:on'stiiuents, gun owners: and ,h_~n-g~n owners aJike, ~ d~1e for you ~d ~Oli~ colleagues
to pass common sens~ gun laws and to ensure those laws ire prupc,fy 'implemented. Oun violence is a
cifsis. and we cannot continue 10 disregard lhe th~t li pose+-

:ATf' is Essential to Combl!tin~ Gun Vi!'lehce

ATf is th~ only f~eral agency authorized to resl!la!e lireamis-and th~ gun industry, [n our-
l:l!ffl:!!1 system, the United Stales cann91 enforce gun laws and prevent. violence wi!hout ihe Bureau of
Afcul1ul, Tubucw, 'fi1anns, anti E1111lusjv.1$ (ATF}, ATF·'s 111u11t1111e inclutle!dic1in~ing.unil uwil<l#ng.
fecieniliy Ji~n~ fil'eilrftls dealers (FF.Ls), who serve is llie fi~ lin~ of defense between. A1neri¢ns a_niil
gun traffickers, In n:gulating FFLs, ~TF can prevent gun lraflicliirig. arid the yiolcnce it leads to,
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 109 of 236

23

n. O,•ersigbt of the Gun lnilustry

Those .who oppose·passing any new fireanns lcgislnlion often sny that the country should
~enforce the laws oa the books." Taking this nigument ln sood faith., anyo,te who de111aiids rob,1s1
enforct'ment of current law should 6e ad.Ycicat.ing for ATF to have all the re5ource.s ii needs. lnste:id.
mnny of the !mmqjroponcnts for cnfordng_ aT1Tcnt gun ln111s arc. seeking tt, "dcfu11dM or even abolish
ATF. Given.the 1:nleofsome gun indu~ry actors in pcfpcruati11ggun violence, this isn n1istnke.

Almost all fircanns in circulation are sourced from 1hc lawful market Generally. mamifacturel'!'
and importers sell to diStTibutors. who ;;ell to dealers, who sell to the. public. Dealers ~ho1ild aerecn for
$igli~ of'gtln trafficking, such as $11!lW jlurc.lidse..s; and mo$t do so thoroughly. In file~ the large miijoritY
or gun dealers ;viii not hnve a single criine gun tmcod to ihcm ,in any given year .Rnther, it is a small
number of dcnlc-rs whose negligcn; prnctice., disproponionntcly filter guns dTrcct!}' inio the. criminal
market: according 101he last available data, nearly 70"/4 offircahns thoi are t<11ccd to crime were soorccd
fronijust over J% ot'licc1\scd deniers.'

Even though the portion of the gun indushy disprop0riionn1ely responsible for supplying.crime
guns is C.'C'cccdingly small, the. ATI' noncthell:5$ strugf!le.~ 10 meet i~ own oversight goals bec:iuse iL h!Ls
been sy.stematic,nlly underfunded. under-resourced, and unfairly demonized for decades lndeed,just this:
year. Congress voted ro red1ice ATl's budget, despite epidemic gun violence.

These obstn1cilons erode ATF's oversight cnpncity, forcing hardworking lbw enforccmem ngcms
to r<--giJlatc a behcmoih·indf1st,y with 1hcir am,s lied bcblnd' iheir backs. This nl·gativcly nffecis Staie
nnd locni b,~ cnforccmcn1 invcstigAtfons, which are !ell to pick up thc_pieccs nsin-ei:ponsibic, negiigcm,
onmlawful i11dusuy actors skin accountability mid con.tribute to the [nfJux of guns into illegal actiyjty'
!ind gun violence,

b. .,\~si~ting Sllltl'. nnd-Loc:il Law Enforcement

A1F also play~ an essenltal role in supporting.Slate and loe,1I law enforcement by genernii11g
investigative leads and 'information on guns recovered 111 crimes and facilitating important training.• for
officers to better unltersta1id advnncing firearm tcchnoloi,,")'. These services strengihen'Stnte and iocal
iaw c11fot'cerrift1t, providing them ,v:tth infommion, coordination, an.d cducMfon nL-tc.s!lary to en forte
e.-iisti'ng laws nnd pre~cnt furure gun-crimes.

ATF operates twenty-five Crime Gun fntelligcnce Centers (CGIC~) a'Cross the nation\2 lhcse
Ccm~li serve as i11telligence·hilbs ihat gnther and annl~"e data and illformatit\11 from. numerous levels oi
law cnforccmcm in order 'lo generate information necessary to track do\vtl i11vcstiga1iye leads, CGICs
mnalgamate prc!Cc:sse's nnd. lcchniques to genemte.infonnation webs, including the Nationnl Integrated

1 ATF, C:?f!l>riifOc irt J·lN4f!II~ in rM U1>f1Pr./ Sll'1<'$l3 (2000).

' A'rF. f'nr:J Si11,e1 c (,',1mr (:;,,; i11flllflj;,m:,, c~mtr.,· (('GI(') (J1111r:.lll23),
www.ntf.gov/=11tcc-ccn1e.,.,-raei-~hee1/foet•,t..,1-cri1ne•!\Ull-imeliiJlencr,cc111e,,,_,,glc.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 110 of 236

24

Ballistic {11fom1~1.ion Network~ (NIBIN} and the National tracing Cepter' (NTC). NIBrN u~es·bnllistic
imnging· tcchnology to annly7.e the. unique marking on rccoven.--d shcil casfogs. Identifying maichcs
between the casinss and ~pecific lircam1s. 'nte1;e morche, can be used to generat¢ link$ bctw~n lin:arms
ust"d in different crime scenes. For examph\ ,n 2022. Tuxas law enforcement officers, in collal\Onition
,vtrh NIBIN, wereable•to link two seeniihglyunrclaledgun violence inci!lenis. By ahaly2ing uniq~e
a~pect.•ofbullct ca.sings, NlB.lN and investigators-were able 10 connccra.29-yearold io bolh II fatal
shooting ofa 62-year old nnd.an accidental shooting in a Wahnart parking lot.'

WhileNIBlN' focuses on connections in ballistics, the.l.llational iracing Center (N"rC) foe.uses on

lhc pa!h l)f fireapns. The NTC utlljzc!< lhe cTracc prOgtam,6 thr<iugh whic!h it ~hares traee infotniation
with .state and lotnl lnw·enforcement agencies llint hnveopled-in. When state and local nufhorities.
recover crime. guM in tlleir respeclivejurisdi~ions, u,ey send the 1uake. tnodel, and serial ifWlibet 10
ATF. ,vhicit uses that information to tracNJ1e chain ofcustody of that Ciream, from its mMufnc1ur1.,- or
imponcr 16its iasr lml'.nvr'I -1'.Ciail snic.Thcse Stm tmccs are critical for law en_forccm'ent llgencJcs. to
iny~'Sligate and solve fi.rearrn-re!ated ctjJ'lles as tl\ey allow.t\ien\ 10 di:vet.op investigative lea_ds and lie
fin:arms ton SU!lJ)CCt. The number of-crime gun. lmces conilucted·by ATF ha.Hteadily grown lfytr !he
lnsr several years. lh 2022, the NTC j>roce.'ISed aver: 500,/)0fl lite.inn tt~te requests fot guns tecoveted ii,
the United States.' up from jusl under 340,000 in .2017.~ Without th~~ typos of investi!lalivc leads. State
and local law cnforccmtnt would be. grcady hindered iii .being able to solve firearm-related crimes.

ATFafso,pravides law·enfdrccmcnl ag!!ndes wi1h·csse11tial training on cvclving firearm

technolo~ and investigative tac:tfcs. Law enforC!'menl iJrOfe.,sionals must be able to collaborate \\'ith
ofher ngcncics and ten1ain up to date. on 'evolving firearm tcchnologi_cs in order to effectively prevent
anil ,!olve fircarnt related erimc. ATF provideS n,lmt:r(liis t(ai_nint pn'itirams to Seate, and local la_..,
enforcement Umt nllow,them to develop·necossary invesligative,skills lo solve complex crimes. First
launched in 1999, tire National l'ircarms Extiminer Ac.adem:f (NFEA) offers a. year-long 1111ining
program educating law enforcement of numerous jurisdictions ·on firearm forensics. 11,e Nf'Bi\ also
offers individualized courses on Serial Number Restnration1nand Toalmal'k .E~aminat1on, Companion,

J /\Tl', Nn1lnnal,l11l1!f!.Mll!;I l},11/il<llt: lnfart111r1IM _vt,..,u*-(.zylBl,\9,

www,n1Uov/ii~nilst1ational-inlc<,,1ratal,biilJLqic-inronnalnill-lielw/nl<--nibi11.
'IITF. No1/!l,ml '!nrcrllJl <,mu.•""'"'::,t.f.So\"lfilll<lml.s/1111tio10i-101Ci11i;-ecnll!r.
~ M.,ggic l'nlsll:r, F/~u, ;1TFJinl/£ef"te Ott,,,,,,,.., 1{4/p.,· 1b-1r1 i'o/1,:r $ah-. (;1111 / iaft11"6 ('n,"'.~·Officcr.oorn (Nov, 28.
21122):
wltw.oll"K.-cl:°conolim•cstig-•lionsmircns1<ls/lin::i'n11>-id1:nli(11:.itim,/""'1"'2128S3,9/h11"·•itf-baUistic·-dl11nba.""•hclps-te.
>1.,s-poticc-solw-tllfll-violcllCC'Cl!SC5,
• !/« ATT', i'lir.r!Jhu, • <1;m:,; Jnr,r,,~1-hn.<fll MtMflll.O "frttt:lhg 11111/,1tllf(l'SIS (Apr..2023}.
,hN.Ol£.g,n'fttsl\11~ll!<dlllct-shctt/£nr:t.sl1ec1~race,i1~•n~-iiased-fii't1tnll!>-lmcin.i;,,iltl-C1ndlj'sis.
'St:~ A'(l.'. tbp CalTMNt Rta1>•eml nntf'rrru:ltd in ihe Ur,rterl !/t,1ir.t1111d"tcrr1/orh:$ - l'l' 10:),
,,1111·.a1r.go,•ln:soiut.c--cCh1tr/doc9rcpon/l~libe_rs-roco1~-And-1rn=t••llfltal'.s1a1es-n~ld-territories--<)~-21l22.
&11TF, N;,lfn11al 1'7rt!nrm~ Ccr111Nertrl' Mtl Tr..!{l/dll11s: ,,.,......,,.,,, (.\'f"Cbl>: Crime t,uns, l'tl/11111~ Twa. l'nrl lh:
('..lfme G111tsRr.arir,ml /11td Trnt'I!(/ ,vlthln tha L'nfttd Sia/es m,d /t, Tl>mt(J1'16 l (M,,r. 27. 1024)
• I\T:'f,.Fwnrtll,._flt/tll,r/ T'rdjl1/o,1tj,fr /_,,.r ,I';,lf~~nt•I!',
..,1·w.:11f.b,;,,-J<:nrccis/rin:ilm.S;rclattd-t111in1ng•l•w-cn1bnlcmcnl.
,. ATP. ,vnnl Nmnh,r RC$1DW1t1on 7mlnl•1,!! t<'li1u-;t! /0 FR.\-1,<;.C,"-1)()21),
ml'lr.otf,gov/lini:Jnnsfscrial-mmibc:r-it:stn1:11ialf-imining-cou,sc-id-£m1S-c,;()()22
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 111 of 236

25

and Tdentification. 11 Additio11ully, An' oifo-seducation f01:la,1reJ1fotcemcnt listi-s ofNlBIN, tn1ini11g

ihem on how to perfonn acquisi1ion·s nnd c!\rrelations.in the ,y-stcm.'; Together. these programs provide
Federal, Sietc, and local .law enforcement with lhc ~kills to engage in [nvrstigative fircann forcnsrcs.
Addit1onnlly, the Project Sate NeighborhoC1ds Enforcement '!'mining course provides a jurisdiction·~ lnw
enforcement. agcn<,y and justice sySlern ,1/irh n mulrkiisci plinil r'} 2·pproaeh 13 to combaL violent crimes.
Tl1i5 prograo, fa'cilitatcs a coordinated effort in invesiigati11g,11rosccuting, mid preventing frr,:amf
trafficking nod gun viole11.:e inl:idenf~. In n,nning thes-e education programs. ATP is able lo increase
information-shnring and coordination bc1ween v11rious law enforcement agencies Thrs cro~s,jurisdictfon
collnb_oration reduces rhe ability for gun traflickcrs nntl other bnd acthrs to c,perate, reducing instances c,f
gon ,~olcncc. and saving billions of 111,~ payer. dollars."

ATP serves as an ci:s~11tial paru1erto la,veil.lbtc~mentl\!,encics :icross the co,muy and be~nd. Y~l.
wilh limited resources. ihc Burc~u is unable to•fulfi.JI irs duryto State (tf'ld loeal lnw enforcement
ellic iently nnd ro its mnxi mum ca_paci ly. For c.'<am pie. ,\'tF clas~i fies "routine'' traces a;; r~J.:ing. seven to·
ten day$ to c9mplcte" Yet, in 202.l, it wM·rc1,oncd thnr non-expedited traci;s rnke an average or t-ll~lvc
to Rrurtet,n days lCI complelc, 16 These additional days matier when.law enforcement i~ in,·estigaliflg
vlolcntcri"mcs, the loi1!!,C1" thnt· perpetrators of violcm climes arc not hcld accbuntr.blc for their action~,
th~ m.ore lives are at risk.

I. c. Implementing nnd Enforcing.the Law

ln-102:2. Congress passed the Bipartisan SaferCon1111unities Act (BSCA). the lil'<t la11dmark_gun
violence prc.vcntion law enacted in nearly 30 years, Included in BSCA was a dclinifion chnngc about
those (vho shoold be considered "engttgcd in the bl1sincss" of dealing firearms, and as n ~ns"cquencc,
should ·be licensed as an FFL." As ATF has sole federal juri~dictional ·auUiority over licensurc and fho
liream1~ industry. it finaliz..>d a rule 10 provide the public and tl1e indusuy clatitv about whatihi~
dcliriilional 'chanfc!c m<:anl<

Pri6c tn \he pa.,,age QrBSCA, tlie Gun Cofitrnl Al:! ot' !968 (('.CA). rl!q(,ircd those engaged in the
business of fireanns :o'ol:>tain a federal llreannsl"icensc.nnd follow all att~1dani: responsibilities., such as
conducting Brady background checks, Although the Brady b:ickground check system h!tS prevented over,

11 ATF. T,:,,.,/nln>1t lrltnt/Jicflunn tmd Comprrrt•cm 1foh,o,.~ {(;~;,m, ID 1'11.\{S-CS.O(JliJ,

,iww.;tff gn,•1fueamtS/foofur.11tc.•lrJeurit~c.1~ion~md<nn.1parison-.tmJ1tfni~u~•id•frnn.-cs-0027.
"ATF. NfBT.\' Trh;m'r(~ O,ltl/lH! """ ~•ttc/~lmc.•, n! ,11iN·.11r.go,trorc:11ii~nibin.jmi1\ins,,rntlil\e•and'~•ldelillt$,
"The pro.gmm is"a collabornu\'c olforf 0111011,g {l,c U.S. Dcj)(lrtll!Ott of Jusfioo, 1ltc hrtrni:ilion:u· As.qx:iutiono(
Clri~Js or Polit:<', (IACPi. Lhc Mitionnl Oisnfcr, J\llomcy's A~.<>cih1io1i 11,c N:ttioMt C'nmc ~-cinion Council ilnd
ATI'." ATF, t•r.,jul s11p ,V~tghliqrl1n0,t, /;11J-•i.11 TMlnlng fi'SA' 3.J/,ry,N;,gnn,,),
;,,w11.tnt.r,o,·/fire11m1s/p"'Jcc1-st,rc-ntighb6rl1ooil.~..:nfoi6<:mcn1aminini;.·vs11·3-<L,)'·pll>grnrn.
u_s•.1 e Mark f)llhn:m rt :11 .... 'l'fte rritc-~Cr,.n r.>{Orrrt l·foftnLE In A'm~rkil. l\·lother Jo~ (Apr. 15, ZOl 5).
"""''·· n10ilw,j<lnos.~•nifpoli1i<f!12!ll f./04/lnio..:osk>r-gun-\'iolc1>.~in-11n1cri.-:i.
'~ St-r ATf, ~vo11,_mn! 'l>',Jdng (;e,.,~r, www.01f.go\'tfih?:ii:m5/fr1ti6rt1l-trac-ing-«nti;r (lmces ~lils.~f!ed11i; ?'Rouiinc•·
are Comp!dcd.willrin seven ro ten d.iys on.nvcr:age--='")
,. Su. ~.. ATF: fl',:ti('li!,/ Ai"<'arm., C<>1nmert,, r,h// 'fmjfieklng ,l,<.l"t-'-<!?M/11 (Nfl:1;11.- Crt,11e G1,,,.~ ;1;1~1m.• r,,,,:,.
Pnr1 JI): Crime (Junskec,,,.,_.,..,J m,d 'frrn:etiwlihin th, r/11irc,r.',1m,.rnml 11'< 1"trrunrie, I (M;1c 7.7.2024).
"si., 1s use~- 1121(n)(2l)(C)
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 112 of 236

26

four million _prohibited tire.inns transfer$ since 1,993, the no.rrow dclinirion of~cngagcd in the business"
included in the F,ircarm Owners Pl'oteetion. ,o\,c~ of I986 (FOl'A) hod ~II owed (1l\licen~cd' dealers tO
circumv~nt 11,e backsround check proces~. •i threatening.to public !08fety. Prior to the enactment of
BSCA. one in live firearms sold in America "'ere sold without a background check- resulting in,
millio11s of fire-dm1s potentially ending up i11 the hand~ of prohibited persons.••

The,;e unregulated sale~ are-far, 111ore than a mm: loop)olc: unlicensed dealers arc a deadly
public safety threat.,\ receni ATF linalysis·hu found !hilt "unlicensed dealers wcn::,assdciaicd wiih ihc
largest mrmber oF trafficked liremms (68,388) and avetiiged i0 trafficked lireanns per imle,¢gatioil,"~~
;\nd.contr;uy to mischaracterization~, many ofthe individuals engaged in regular unlicensed !!)JO 5aJes
were not bobb)>isls or oile-olf sellors. but repeated playcfs in the ti rearms nillrke1. An nmicils brief filed
by several gun violence prevention organii.aliOl!f1 illustrates.se:vernl instances of unlicensed individuals
cngagl"ng in persis1cn't ~n ·sales 10 deadly effect 12 Jn one inston.::c, an i11dividual bn.1ghi numerous guns
from FFl.s and immediately resold the111, without completing b:ick&roun,d checks, to his "customers.~
who were prohibited plin:hasers,1.'ilie man"s customers·weni on io i:ommit s~enu shoolin£$, including.
Ol!e tl)at killea a. 2-y~at-(lh;I." Thar i~ j1lst one example of miu:ty~tuM:ibn~ in v,hich unlitel)sed defiler.I
have·s<ild.lirearms to individuals who tookinnoc:enl live$. That is ,.;hy Congre.."5 passed BSCAand
expanded !he ''engaged in. the bu~inc.~s• definition.

BSCA e.-cpnnded the dcfiniiion o("cngnging in-the business~ of clcalin_g fireanns to apply to"n
person who devotes time, altc!1tion. and ltbor to dliillngir\ li.n::arm-s as a reg11l'ar ccurse oflradc or
business io 11redo111fl1t11itl►: tam o p~fit tlmiugh the repeti1ive purcha.-c and re$:l1C oflircanns.w".Under
the ne,v.dclinition; individuals whocurrrody serve as 1inlicensed denier.; now will be l'e<JUired to regis1er
ann FPL anil conduct background checks.on all snlcs and trnn~fers lhcy fllcilitate. TI1is will grentiy
reduce !h~ abilitf tor g\ln traffickers and prohibiled person~ ~9 circ1lmvL"llt 1hc ba\\im!Olmd ch~~ system
and to divert firearms into illegal activity.
·1n order to provide ndditionai c:lnrification on what this new de.linition means (o. everyday
Americans, 1he Jus1icc Ocpanmem onnouncc'd on August J. t, 2023 that it hnd 51.1\,mined Ii notice or
prol)osed rulemukin~·ih.it would clarify the cin:umstanccs fn wllich a person is Hengag'cd 'in fhe

'"Tl"' Firearm 01\iicrs P,oredion Acl (Pnb,l.. 9!1-3'18) included a fonr!1X111 le$I rordc1e!"11fiillJ!.ifon int!Mdfsil ,r.is
enga~ in 1lie t,n.<lr.s., '"~ oolabl)• 1"'11 Oil> ~ISOft was •"8/lltcd l'llh i-..1,1uhe pdncipal.olljec(ivc oru~cllh.oC!d
andpmtit."
!• ~ M:uih:>1' MIiier ct~[. FiR:llmi Acqu[$11ion WllllOUI B:ickgl'oilild Chccks,.IM Arlll~koClnicm:tl Med. ::;;
fl017), 11ussmiistic·docs =nm fot ,;batt gutl!I ru,d glio,;i gun lcirssnlos, disc11sscd in 111c roU/mini.; P.,'lgCS.
to All'. !\•otltlTml Flmtm,s Cnnnnercc nml Tra,qid.~rg "·""-""''""-' (Nft°r,jJ: l'ir,nrm, •
lrl!JFr.llll1Rl"'"'·"lgt11inn•, IIJ/ln1~71lti1t; PmtXJ;Su11111""1.ohtlCMehLf/011.•2 (Mof:?!. !l!M).
" Aaik:i an:: Bn\lly C'enltr 1o·Pil:,·e11t Cllm Violcnoc: Mmi:h ror011r Lives; Ciiltom.l;- Law Ctn1cr to Pic,·cn1 Gun
Viol,"ce:-lmd 6\'eiy1own rorOun S~lcl)•.
"Br!~r Rn- .Brndy Conltr ol 111. ns ,\midCllril\': Snpp<!r1mii Dc(ondtfet~. Tt.,:is,•, ATF, ::,Jo, 2-kv,~, (N.D, Tc,<., May
14, 201!) (F.CF No. 27-1), •
,,.,,1.
-:./ti.
"Bipiiitl.san S.1rcrCammn11i1ics AoL Pub. T.. 11'1-U?,,q:c, 120!JJ, 1Jll SlaL 131J, 132-1 f202ZHcodilli:d 11i 18
U.S.C, j921{ar)(ll\(C)\.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 113 of 236

27

bu~incssr of derrling in fire.'lnns. The·rulc wa.~ finalized. on.April 'IO of this year, providini the public
and the liteltrms,ndustry wjth neededcla1:ily llbbut the chang_es 11\11hori1~d by Con!!"-'$:< in BSCA.

Coni:l11siori
Gun violence Is- on-. epidemfc, llild' the. ~ n t deluge of gun violence threntens each and eve!)
resident and visitor imlhe United Stales. As the sole foderal ayency authorized to regolateJiream1s and
the gun industf)~ ATF serves an esscn"tinl. function lo la,v enforcement ~gencics nationwide-and tile
Americnn prople. Yet; ATF'faces repeated dcfunding and even threats of disbandment that cripple its
ctTecii vcncss,

As you and your colleagues procl11imcd in these very halls durin~ Police Weck just tl.1ys)lgo, it is
vitai that we support law enforcement in their cffons 10 prevent and solve violent crime. If ,ve·truly
support Stnle ana l.ocal law enforcement. then we must ensure they have access to the infonn.rtion and
resrnircl:s \hey nl!ed to complete their jobs and secure. public .\'llfety J1,etefl'!re, Congn:s~ niust fully' func;I
lhe Bureau of Alcohol. Tobacco, F:ireanns, and J;itplosives so ·1ha1. ihey can continue l'o partner with
0\hcr law enforcemenr ngencics-nnd prevent violent crime.
With proper funding, ATF pro(lide~ appropriMeoversightover the firenmi industry - enforcing the
naliun's gun laws, preventing lirem111 trafficking. nnd holding theilidividuols who break tl)c law
accountable for ihcir nctions, HowC\/Cr, when ATf is. untler-rc.~01,n:ed and hindered from cllmplctin)l. its
man.dare. State and local law enforcement agencies are left 10 floonder ·inilepcndcnli.y anti 1he •fiream,.
indt1Stry operates ,~ithout a proper accountatiility sy~tem

Polls show that gun ·violence prevention polities are oven~helminiM popular with lhe Am"rican
peopl~ Every day. gun violt11ce impacts more nnd more ofyour cons_tlruenis: and everyday mote and
more-Americans are ru.1<ing· for commi:msensc measures to end glin violc11ce. Jt's never too late to siwe
An,encon lives. Use.your power and, rake action 10-.,revent-;gun violence loda.y.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 114 of 236

28
Chair JORDAN. Thank you, Ms. Sampson.
Mr. Cummins, you're recognized.
STATEMENT OF BUD CUMMINS
Mr. CUMMINS. Thank you, Mr. Chair, Ranking Member Plaskett,
and thank you, Representative French Hill, for the introduction.
Representative Hill has been very engaged and concerned about
the death of Bryan Malinowski in his district and we really appre-
ciate his help bringing attention to this tragedy.
My name is Bud Cummins. I'm an attorney for Bryan Mali-
nowski's family. I'm a former United States Attorney from the
Eastern District of Arkansas.
I want to tell you a little bit, Mr. Chair, about Bryan Mali-
nowski. Until two months ago Bryan was the Executive Director of
the Bill and Hillary Clinton National Airport in Little Rock. He is
53 years old.
He and his wife, who's present with us today, Maer, celebrated
their 25th Anniversary last December and he had many, many
good friends. He grew up in Pennsylvania with his brother and his
two sisters and he wanted to be a fighter pilot, but he didn't have
the eyesight.
So instead, he went and got his certified-became a certified
flight instructor, got a college degree, and went into the airport
management industry and he had several stops along the way in
Pennsylvania, Florida, but in El Paso, Texas, is where he met his
wife Maer and, as I said, they've been married 25 years.
He found his way to Little Rock and eventually was named the
Executive Director of our airport. By all accounts he's very good in
his profession.
Our airport is one of nine-I've heard a few different numbers-
less than 12 in the country that's debt free and that maybe that's
a concept that's strange here in Congress but I think that rep-
resents some good management.
Bryan was also a lifelong collector. As a child he started col-
lecting coins. He had various hobbies. He was that guy. I've been
to their home and seen books this thick about coin collecting, col-
lecting currencies, and other-about card playing. He studies card
playing, and he tried his hand at competitive card tournaments.
About six years ago Bryan's father gave him his gun collection
and that sparked interest-a new interest, a collection interest in
Bryan, since then he has become also a gun collector and at gun
shows he found other people who shared his enthusiasm and his
interest in not only guns, but in coins, and other artifacts that
you'll find at a gun show.
He'd set up a table on weekends occasionally and he'd display
some of his guns and he'd display his coins, and he would buy, sell,
and trade with other collectors. It is legal to buy, sell, and trade
firearms without a Federal firearms license if you're a collector or
a hobbyist.
At some point ATF suspected that Bryan Malinowski may have
crossed a very murky line, and he was no longer a hobbyist. Be-
cause of that, ATF concluded that he was required to buy a $200
FFL-Federal firearms license-before he sold any more guns.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 115 of 236

29
One thing is certain. His family and his friends and all his work
colleagues would all guarantee you if they were here today that he
loved his career and he loved being in the airport management
business, and if anybody had ever suggested to him that his week-
end hobby was in any way threatening that he would have imme-
diately been hands off.
Nobody told him. Instead, ATF launched a criminal investigation
into Bryan. They researched his background. They put a tracker on
his car. They put tails on him and surveilled him, and soon they
obtained a search warrant to search his home.
By the time they obtained the warrant they knew a lot about
Bryan. They knew he worked in a secure environment at the air-
port. .
They knew he had lived a law-abiding life with absolutely no
criminal history, and they knew he lived at home with his wife and
his two dogs, and they kept a very regular schedule.
Despite all this knowledge, ATF hatched a plan to execute the
warrant by force and on March 19th at 6:01 a.m., over one hour
before sunup, 10 carloads of ATF agents, and Little Rock Police De-
partment officers came to the Malinowski home to execute the
search warrant.
They wore full tactical SWAT gear, and they approached the door
at 6:02:42 a.m. That's about one hour and 15 minutes before sunup
that day.
They had a piece of tape ready, and they covered up his doorbell
camera so if he had time to wonder who was at the door-I think
people get a doorbell camera to see who's at the front door, but
they took away his ability to do that.
Moments later Ms. Malinowski heard a loud crash as their front
door caved in and fearing for his wife's safety, Bryan jumped up
at the sound of a crash, found a pistol, loaded a magazine in it, and
left the bedroom to investigate.
He warned his wife to stay behind him in the bedroom, but she
stubbornly followed him through the doorway. It appears to us that
ATF also killed the electricity to the home, making it difficult for
Bryan to see in the predawn hours.
Ms. Malinowski saw only darkness as she peered down toward
the front entryway and could see shadowy outlines of presumed
home invaders standing in her front hallway. That's what Bryan
saw, too. There was gunfire and Bryan was fatally wounded.
His wife was standing just a few inches from him when he re-
ceived a fatal wound to his head. A mere-we know-we don't
know all the details of what happened at the front door because
they covered up the Ring camera, and because they didn't wear
body cameras in spite of a three-year-old policy initiated by the
President of the United States that mandated that they wear body
cameras when executing search warrants.
We do know this. We know 57 seconds elapsed from the time
they covered up the lens of the camera to the time Mr. Malinowski
was dead. So, something less than 57 seconds is the time it took
them to knock, if they knocked, but we don't know if they
knocked-forced entry on the front door and for Mr. Malinowski to
emerge-to wake up, find a gun, and come from the bedroom.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 116 of 236

30
That means they couldn't have been at the front door more than
20-30 seconds. Although, her husband had just been shot in the
forehead right in front of her, the agents dragged Ms. Malinowski
into the front yard. She was barefoot, wearing minimal night cloth-
ing and the temperature was 32 degrees.
They locked her in the back seat of a car where she was detained
for four or five hours. She begged to be allowed to check on her
husband, but they refused those requests and kept her locked in
the car in her nightgown.
She also had not been to the restroom yet since she'd just gotten
out of bed and they refused her request to go to the neighbor's and
use the restroom and then, finally, took her to a nearby fire sta-
tion, made her walk through in her nightclothes in front of the fire-
men and use the restroom with a female police officer present in
the room while she went to the restroom.
Ms. Malinowski does not have the answers to many of her ques-
tions and there are a lot of questions. We give Federal law enforce-
ment awesome powers. We have given-and when I was a United
States attorney, I was responsible for the use of those powers.
It's a huge problem if those powers fall into the wrong hands. Ev-
eryone-I've been involved in public controversy for many years.
I've never been involved in anything that more Arkansans have
come to me to express their concern and they all ask the same
question, why, and I don't have an answer for that.
We don't have an answer to that question, and we hope this
Committee will pursue this and find the answer why, and if there's
not an answer we hope that you'll find the problem and fix it.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Cummins follows:]
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 117 of 236

31

Propt>scd testitnt>nr «,»f Bud Cummins

·Select Committee ori Weapobization of"the federal G"9ver1nnent
May 22,-~024, 10:00. am, Rayburn iiii~

MY name is Bud Cummins. l am.an a~om~y ~d !l former United .States

Attorney.
thank y(!U for ihvi!lri& me lier(: to~y to t¢ll you about Btyan ~aim!',)~tci.
Until two months·~go, Bryan ~alinowski was- the Executive.Director of the Biil
81!~-Hillary Clinton National Aµ-port ih titt~e R,ock.He was S} years old. He
and his Wi"re celebrated their'2Slh lifiiliyetsaey last De~mber and he bad many
gooci friends:
Bryan~~ iri Pelinsylvariia with his brother.and two sisters and attended a
summer camp where J1e learned ·to shoot and safely handle firearms.
After he saw. top Gun., Bryan wanted t.o. fly fighter Jets; bQt he couldn't ~ee well
enough so-instead he.became a certified flight instructor and obtainetl a degree
in airport management.
Hi? thl?!l worked at different airports including a stop in El P.aso, w~e~ he met
his wife, MaerMalj.nowski. ln iQt9 Bryan became Pie Executive Director of
the aiiport in Little Rock.
Bryan was an avid collector who pursued various lioboies and cc;,llections and
read books' about toins; old curtepcjes, and'-~d-p~aying sfrat~gies.
About four years ago, Bryan's father ga:ve hi~'bis· gun coU~ori and it sparked.
a new intere~ in Btyan. At ~n shows, he found other.enthusiasts and collectqrs
who shared his interests. On some week'en~ he.·'Alould .set up a tilble at a gUI1,
show to 4,isplay his coin and gun collections.
.It is iegal to buy.. trade;, and sell guns.without a Federal. Firearms License if you.
-~ a collector or h:~bb_yist.
At-some point, ATF ~ecided Utat Bryan Malinowski .l:!ad cros·sed a murky line.
and he·w~ no longer a hobby_lst. Be~use ofthat ATF concluded be was·
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 118 of 236

32

required to purchase a $200 Fed-eral Firearms iicense be(ore he sold llhy mot'~
guns. I call 'it a ''murky" line bec~use tliere-is no bright line .test-it's subjective ..
One thing seems certain, Bryan received no warning. His fa~ily, his friends,
and his work colieagues would ail guarantee you he· ioved his career and would,
have never knowingly jeopardized it 6ver a weekend hobby.
ATF tailed Bryan in his car, They put a tracker on his car. And they obtained a:
w~t to !leatch his home..
On March 19, at' 6:01 am, over one boll!" before.sunup, fen carloads of ATF·
ag~nts and Little Rock PD officers came to the Malinowski horn~ to exectJ!e
their search warrant
At 6:02:46 am ATF agents.in full-SWAT gear·approacheii the front door. 'Ibey.
had apiece o.t'tape ready to cover th~ ~qiera lens of the doorbell camera
N~xt, Mrs. fylalinowsltj. hea~-d pnly a loud crash as her frorit doo!," caved in.
Her husband Bryan woke tip t(? the sound of the crash; found. a pistol, load¢ a·
magazine, and ieft the bedroom to investigate.
Bcyanwamed his wife to stay behind in thebedroo~ but Maer stubbornly
followed him doWf! the hallway.
J\TF-appareritly killed electrici'ty to the home. The front room was usually well•·
lit atnight. But Maer saw only dar~ess as slie pee~d down towards the front
entryway. She could only soc shadowy outlines of presumed home invader:,
standing.in her fronthallway, 1.nat'.s what Bry8!}.saw·too,
Bryan :fired a few shots at the intruders' feet apparently to drive them back out
the front door. ATP shot Bryari. in the hea~ His wife was standing 'inch~ -away,
from·film.
A m~re fifty-seven seco!lds elapsed from· the tirile agents covered the doorbell
camera until. gunshots erupted anq Bryan was' fata!lywounded (6:02:46 to
6:03:43);
Agents immed1ately·dragged Mrs. Malinowski into the front yard. She was
barefoot wearing minimal nignt clothing, and the temperature was 34 degrees.
They locked her in tlie back seat of a car and detained het there for four or five
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 119 of 236

33

h~urs, refu~µig her many requests to check on lier ~~band; .get some clotlies
on, or even use the neig~bor's bathroom.
'Even though policies have been in place at both ATF atid the qttle Ifock ,Poli~e
Department for the past ~e years regtiiring the use ofbody-wc;,m.cameras.
when ~xecpting any search warrant, DQ) now ~ys no boclt cameras wer_t: used..
There. are so many \inanswered questions.
• Why WllSn't l;Jryan "Malinowski; warned tliat Jie might be in·violation of'
ATF's regulation?
• How did apere-eived_gun show violation rise to the level of justifying a.
search w~t application? •
• What exigent circumstances justified the aggressive tactics of a pre-dawn
Search wmant executiQn using a., SWAT teain and forced entry?
·• :Did ATF consider other options to execute the.search warrant?
• Did the officers att~ll!Pt to !mock on the, door or ~Diehow lllinolince
themselves as law enforc~ment officers?
• If they knocked and announced, how long did they wait before forcibly
entering? Ten seconds? twenty seconds?
• Why wasn;t anyone:oil the scene. using ab"ody-wom camera?
• Did ATF instructLR.PO to· take oft" their body cams?
We give feder~l law enfdt'Ce!llent awesome powers in the nm~ Qfl~wan~
order, bufit's a bu~e probiem if those powers fall into the. w.rong hands,
:rbe shooting d~ of~ryan Malinowski is.the result ofan:c;,utrageous and
llrljustifiabl¢ abuse of power. its.family, including those pfesenttoday,hiswi(e.
Maer, and ms sisters Lee and Lynn, deserve10 know why this h~ppened.
In fagt. for two m·onth~) Brya,n's fami!y ~long 'Vith p~ple all ov~r.Arkansas
hav~ .asked me ope questioh:: "Why'!'•·
Right Ii.OW; I don't have an answer tQ that question} I hope this committee wm
h~lp find the answer or if there tSil't an answer. I no~ this committee· will find·
tlie problem'-,and fix ~t;
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 120 of 236

34

Proj>os¢ testi~onyofBttd Cummins

Select Committee on Weaponization of the Federal ~oyernment:
May i2;.~024, :10:00 am, Rayburn :iUt

My name is Bud Cummin!t I .am an aitopiey ilfld a former United $tates.

Attorney..
Th"lUlk you for inviting me h~~ today to tell you about Bryan Malinowsld.
U!!til .tw9 m~ilths ag91 ~fyan ~alitiowski was fhe E~ectitive D~ctpr ,(?f the Bill
and Hillary Clinton National Airport in Little Rock. He was SJ y~ old. He
find his wif!=- celebrate~ their 2S'h anniversary'last Oec~fnber and he,had many
good friends.
Bryan grew·up in Pennsylvania witl:t his brother and two sisters and a~ended !I
suininer camp where he learned to shoot and safely-handle firearms.
Bry~ tried to enlist ~ the Air Fo~e,. but lfe cc:itildn•t see-weit enough so instead
h~ booame a certified flight instructor and obtain!l(l a business mati~!=-~ent
degree.
He then entered tiie fi~ld ofairport management, He:Wo'rk~~ at different airports,
i~i,:luding a sf~p in El Pas9, wh~re ~e met.his wi.fej Ml!er Malinmyski .' In .2019
Bryan ~ e the Executive Director of the airport· in Little. Rock.
B_ryan was an avici cotlecfor who pursued various hobbies and collecti!)i1S,atid
reacl books' abolJ!. C'Quis, oid currencies, and card=playing strategies.
About four years !i,go, Bryan•s father gave him fils ~-collection and it Sparlced
a new interest in Bryan. At,glll'.i shows, he found other enthusiasts and colll!ctcirs
who s\lared his.interests. On some weekend~ he-would setup a table at a g~
!ihnw to di~pl~y hi!; cni'n :md gµn collection!;. •

:It .is legal to buy, trade; an!l sell gllns with.out a Fecieral Firearms Lice!)lie if you
are a collector or hobbyist,
At so~e point, AJF-~ecided that Bryan Malinowski. had crossed a murky-line,
ai:td h'ewas no longer~ hob_byist Because Qfthat; ATF ~nchided he·was

P.ropQsed testimony or Buel Cummins

Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 121 of 236

35

required ~~ purchtse a $200" Federal Firearms Lice!)Se before he sold any .ino_re
_gtms. l call it a ''mutkytl line·because ~ere is no btjght line test-it's entirely
subjective,
One thing seems ~rtain. Bryan received no warning. His family, his friends, .
.~d his work colleagu~ wo"uld all gi:iarantee·yau he ioved tiis career and woufd
fiavc never knowingly jeopardi:i.ed :it over a weekend hobby.
ATf taµed Bryan·in his car. They put atracketonhis cat.And they obtained a
warrant t~•search his.home:
On,llllan:h t9 ;. at 6:01 am, over one:boar before ~nup, ten carloads ·ofATF
agents-and. Little Rock PD office~ came·to the Malihowski hotne to execute
their search w~t.
At 6:02:46· am ATF ag~~ in full SWAT·gear approached the front door. they
had.a piece-of tape ready to cover the camera fens ofthe.doorbell camera;
Next, Mrs. M,alinowski heard only a loud crash as her front door caved in.
~er husbim<l Bryan rose to,~he sound oftbe qasb, f9im.d a pistol, loade4 a
magazine, and left the bedroom to investigate',
Bcyan·warned his -.yife to stay be'biild in the bedr~m. bu\ Maer.s_tut,bomly
follo,ved him.
ATF apparently kilied electricity fo th~ home. T~e front room was. ~sually well~
Ht ·at night. But Maer saw 13nJy ~arkness ·as sbo pecrod afown ~owi.U'ds the ·.front
~ntcyway. She could only sec l!hadoW)'. outlines of'presumed home ill'laders
ltanding in.her front l'ialtway. That's what ~cyan saw to!),
Bryan fired a few sqots at the intruders' feet ev"idently :to diiv_e them back out
·the front aoor. ATF shot Bryan.in the- ]:lead. His wife was stan<ling inches away
'from him.
Am~ fifty-seven seconds elapsC;d frpm~e time agents cov~red ihe doorbeU
camera until anns4ots·erup!ed and ~ryan was fatally-wounded (6:02:4619
6:03:43):
Age11ts immediately di:ag&~ Mrs. Malii!owski into ~e frohf yard. She was
barefoot wewg tninimal night 'clothing, and th_~ te_m.pet~ture was 31-de~es.

2
Proposed testlmOl'ly of Sud Cummins
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 122 of 236

36

They locked her in the back seat·of a car ll!ld detained ~er there for four.or five
hours, refusing her m~y requests to ·check on .her l\.usband or. to get some
cl9thes. Shew~ subject~ to an interview ~ile in detention.
A:fter'her repeated requests to use a bathroo114 instead of le~g "her wall.c into a
~eighb_or's ho~e to use the ~stroom, !aw erifo~e~t offici~~ ·finally
transported Mrs. Malinowski to a ti.re station, forcil:ig her to walk irt front of
several firefighters wiille liarely dressed in her nigtitcfothes. She was only
allowed to use the toilet while iii. the presence of a female otti~r.
In addition to seeking information about her htisballd,.Mrs. Malir!owski: had
repeatedly inq~ited ab9ut the welfare of their two beloved-dogs. She had been
assured ttie doss w~ fine. 8ut on the way to the-~ station, seve~l'blocks
fr9m her1iomey she spotted one of h~r dogs darting across the street, Ttie officer
detaining her allowed her to collect her pei.
During the entire time ofhttt detentfon, ncjne Of the law-enforceme'nt officials 9n
the scene end!?aVored to !!llSWer ahy. of Mis. Malinowski's questions about.her
husband's.condition. In :fact. they disingenuously told her .she needed-to go to
the ho~ital to ask~ for the gu11-safe !)O~'i?ination. 'f1tey fail~ to tell her that
a-significant portion of I:ier-husband's brain matter was distributed over a broad
area·ofthe walls-and c~iling oflierh.01ne·.
ATF did not permit Mrs. Malino,wski to.~nter her home.until tome fourteen
hours aftet tbe raid began.
Even though poli~ie_s ~ave been in plac~ at boffi. .A1l' and llie Little Roe~ .Police.
Departttfent for-the Rast three years requiring the us:e of bo_dy~worn cameras
when executing:any. search warrant, OOJ says n~ body caiJ!eras· w~· used on
March 19.
There are so inany unanswered ques~ons.
• Why-wasn't-Bryan Malinowski warned'that·he n1igbt ~e in violation gf
ATF's regulation'?
• Ho~ did a perceived gun show violation. rise,to 11-ie· tevel bfjustlfy.ing a
search watrant application'?

Proposed testimony of BliifCumniins·

Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 123 of 236

37

• What exigent ·circums~oces justjfied .the aggressive tactics of a pre-dawn

search warrant execution usin~ a ·SWAT team 'and forced entry'.?-
• Did ATF consider other options·to execute the search warrant?
• Did the officers attempt to knock on the door or somehow ·announce
themselves as law eriforcementofficers?
• If they knocked and announced, how1ongdid they wait before for~bly:
entering? Ten s~nds? 'twenty seconds'?
• Why wasn't anyone on the scene using. a body-worn camera?
• Did ATF'insttUet LRPD to take offthetr body cams?
We give fe~etal ·!a'V enfor~ent awespme power,dn ~e name oflaw and
order, buflt'!i a huge problem if those powers fall into the wrong hands.
The shooting d~ 9tBry~ Malinowski is the resid~ of an outrageous and
unjustifiable abuse ofpowet. His family; including those present today, .his wife
Maer,-!lll~ his sistetS Lee and L}'nn,-deserve to {¢ow ~by this happened.
In fact; for two months, Bryan's family along withpe"Ople all over Arkansas
ha've asked me one question: "Why?" •
Right now, I i;ton't have an an~er to tliat question. I hope this-committee wiU
hell) find the ahsWeror ifth~re isti!t ah answt~, l hope tlii~cpnmiittte will-firtd
fhc;i. prol?lem- !Hid fix i~.

4
Proposed;testimony 01 Bud·cummrns
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 124 of 236

38
Chair JORDAN. Thank you, Mr. Cummins. That was well said,
and so wrong.
The gentleman from-we will now proceed with five-minute
questioning. The gentleman from North Dakota is recognized for
five minutes.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Early morning hours riot shields, probably a no-
knock warrant but either way a full-on Tommy tactical assault on
a residential dwelling.
Mr. Cummins, you said it in your opening statement, but where
did Mr. Malinowski work?
Mr. CUMMINS. He was the Executive Director of the Little Rock
Airport.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Do you know if firearms are permitted at the
Hillary Clinton National Airport?
Mr. CUMMINS. To my knowledge it's like every other airport.
They do not allow you to carry firearms in the airport.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. To your knowledge, had Mr. Malinowski ever
been accused of bringing firearms to work?
Mr. CUMMINS. Not to my knowledge. I'm not aware of him being
accused of any misconduct at his job.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Would it stand to reason that if Mr. Malinowski
had been driving into work or driving home from work, he would
not have brought a gun with him, given that it's a gun-free zone?
Mr. CUMMINS. I think that's a fair assumption.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Do you think that in the process of executing
their search warrant they would have-the FBI or the ATF would
have been able to get a copy of Mr. Malinowski's work schedule?
Mr. CUMMINS. I think his work schedule was well known to the
ATF.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. I want to be, clear, because we're talking ATF
and because we're talking firearms, and we're doing all these
things and this is basically a licensing dispute.
Mr. CUMMINS. Yes, sir, and it's an alleged violation that the defi-
nition is subjective, and it's been actually litigated quite a bit here
recently, and it's become apparent that it's almost-every person in
this room could read it and come up with a different interpretation.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Graham, during your tenure at the ATF
were you ever involved in planning and execution of search war-
rants?
Mr. GRAHAM. Congressman, I have not.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Mr. Cummins, as your time as a U.S. Attorney
did you have a chance to review search warrants?
Mr. CUMMINS. Yes, sir.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. When do you use no-knock warrants? Let me
stop. What's the most dangerous kind of warrant to execute?
Mr. CUMMINS. A no-knock warrant. When you kick the door in
and wake people up out of their beds when they may have a gun
nearby.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. When's the worst time to execute that?
Mr. CUMMINS. Probably at 6 a.m.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. If you're in charge as a U.S. attorney or ATF
supervisor or any of those things, what's your number one concern
when determining whether or not to execute a no-knock warrant?
Mr. CUMMINS. Safety of the officer and safety of the public.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 125 of 236

39
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Was there anything-you talked earlier about
tracking devices and can you go through a little bit of this of what
they were doing prior to the night the warrant was issued?
Mr. CUMMINS. They had followed Mr. Malinowski around town
and surveilled him on numerous occasions. They ran agents in to
do undercover buys at gun shows. They had taken pictures of him
at the gun show.
It's breathtaking the amount of resources for an agency that
claims budgetary constraints that they put this many resources on
a gun show case.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. I can think of 500 different ways in which this
warrant could have been executed to protect the law enforcement
officer and protect the victim in this case. I don't know what else
you'd call them.
What is the stated reason for executing the no-knock warrant?
Mr. CUMMINS. I think in case law you would look for exigent cir-
cumstances. They might be at risk of escape. They might be the de-
struction of evidence. They might be a danger to some other party
that's in the house.
Of all the exigent circumstances I'm aware of that have ever
been discussed in any case none of them existed here and that was
well known.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Likelihood of the evidence being-I mean, sur-
veillance-
Mr. CUMMINS. You can flush drugs.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Yes, all the difference-used a lot-utilized a
lot in drug cases. They know somebody had delivered it at mid-
night. They know it's getting farmed out the next day. So, with all
this information and all the things you know about the case, have
they stated any exigent circumstance for utilizing the known or uti-
lizing this type of enforcement of the warrant?
Mr. CUMMINS. To my knowledge, DOJ has released the affidavit
that supported the search warrant and has called me and Senator
Tom Cotton to tell us that there were no body cameras used that
day and that's the only statement they've made about this case.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. We need to just take a step back here and rec-
ognize if this was anything else other than ATF and firearms peo-
ple would be apoplectic about how this warrant was set up but be-
cause it involves something that has a political reason-but there's
a person dead.
Somebody is dead because the ATF decided to execute a warrant
in the most unprofessional, irresponsible, and dangerous way and
I think that oftentimes law enforcement have a very difficult job.
The number one concern is the safety of the officer.
The reality of this was executed for reasons that make no proce-
dural sense. They make no safety sense, and somebody is dead be-
cause they decided they wanted to go into a house at 1 a.m., of a
known gun owner for the purpose of making-I can't think of any-
thing else-other than a political statement.
Thank you for representing the family. Thank you for being here
today. The ATF has a history of doing these things with warrants
and it has to stop.
With that, I yield back.
Mr. GOLDMAN. Mr. Chair, I have a unanimous consent motion.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 126 of 236

40
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman is recognized.
The gentleman yields back. The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. GOLDMAN. I'd like to introduce the search warrant affidavit
and search warrant, which is not a no-knock warrant.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Was it still at 1 a.m., with-
Mr. GoLDMAN. I don't know how many people in-6 a.m., in
Tommy tactical gear.
Chair JORDAN. Without objection. The Chair now recognizes the
gentlelady from Florida.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I'm repulsed to hear my colleagues' calls to destroy the one agen-
cy that actually provides for firearm safety. I vividly recall the
tragic events that unfolded on February 14, 2018, at Marjory
Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida, in my home
county.
That day our Nation witnessed one of the deadliest school shoot-
ings in American history where 17 innocent lives were brutally
taken and countless others irrevocably changed. The horror of it
still resonates across our community.
In case my Republican colleagues forgot, these victims were stu-
dents and educators with dreams and aspirations snuffed out by an
AR-15, which is a battlefield rifle.
One was Alyssa Alhadeff, a 14-year-old soccer star, another Scott
Beigel, a teacher who died protecting his students. My colleagues
will and are citing what they claim are injustices today, but none
of them will mention Scott or Alyssa's name, nor will they mention
the tens of thousands of others just like them who are shot and die
from firearms each year.
My colleagues also won't share how Stoneman Douglas students
huddled in classes or sent tearful desperate texts to loved ones
while every school parent was knotted in panic awaiting news
about whether their child was alive or dead that day.
My colleagues are not here to talk about those real-life but grim
gun realities. They want to bury those realities and ignore the fact
that the U.S. gun homicide rate is 26 times that of other high-
income countries.
Instead, they brought us here to do the bidding of the gun lobby
and for that they should be ashamed of themselves.
Ms. Sampson, I want us to clear up the ridiculous assertion that
gun dealers' licenses are revoked over minor clerical errors or
typos.
Isn't it true that clerical errors can often be serious problems
that cause guns to fall into a criminal's hands and that a typo
could be an attempt to falsify business records?
Ms. SAMPSON. That is true, and as you noted, when discussing
the zero-tolerance policy there are five enumerated actions that
will qualify and it would be something like falsifying a record
which you cannot do accidentally. You can't by a typo falsify a
record. It has to be a willful and deliberate violation.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Like, for example, it could include not
running a background check on a purchaser when legally required
to or include selling that firearm to a violent felon, correct?
Ms. SAMPSON. Correct.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 127 of 236

41
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. It's fair to say then that clerical errors
includes very dangerous situations where firearm dealers shirk
their duties and sell guns to criminals?
Ms. SAMPSON. That's not only true, but they're not clerical errors
when you look at what they actually are. These are deliberate and
willful wrongdoings.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. One such group of criminals that I'm
concerned about getting their hands on guns are domestic abusers.
Every month an average of 70 women are shot and killed by an in-
timate partner. That's more than two per day in the United States.
Yet, today we sit here so gun lobby lackeys can try to block back-
ground checks that would prevent these abusers from getting guns
in the first place. We're here so Republicans can protect gun traf-
fickers who skirt the rules and let guns fall into criminal hands.
To pretend that noncompliant dealers are the victims when we
are losing thousands of our mothers, sisters, and daughters to
abusers who get their hands on guns sure seems like that's why
we're really here.
Ms. Sampson, how much more is an abused woman likely to die
if her male abuser has a gun?
Ms. SAMPSON. The exact statistic just left my mind, but I believe
it's four times that-
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. I think it's five times.
Ms. SAMPSON. Five times more likely.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Why is that?
Ms. SAMPSON. It's because having a firearm in that situation
makes it more likely for it to escalate quickly, and contrary to some
of the statements around it being an equalizer for women, even if
a woman has a firearm she can quickly be disarmed, and that gun
can be turned against her.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Right. Yet, I've heard my Republican
colleagues say that the solution to this is for women to have guns,
too. Tell me, Ms. Sampson, does a woman having a gun in the
home make her safer against an intimate partner?
Ms. SAMPSON. Absolutely not.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. In general, isn't it true that adding
more guns to a violent situation actually increases fatality rates?
Ms. SAMPSON. That's correct.
Ms. WASSERMAN SCHULTZ. Before I yield back, I want to make
it clear that we have far too many loopholes in our system. For ex-
ample, my Jamie's Law legislation named for Fred Guttenberg's
daughter who was murdere4 at Parkland would prohibit anyone
from purchasing ammunition who is already barred from buying a
gun.
It's a common-sense layer of protection but Federal law doesn't
require a background check to prevent prohibited purchasers from
acquiring ammunition. Jamie's Law closes this ammo loophole.
Why do we need it? Nearly 40,000 people die from guns in the
U.S. every year. That's four people every hour whose dreams are
snatched away by a gun and a bullet, each one leaving a trail of
sorrow and pain for friends and family to navigate over an entire
lifetime.
Now, it's only elected Republicans that are chained to the gun
lobby and Republicans are really good at saying that we don't need
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 128 of 236

42
more laws-we just need to enforce the ones that are already on
the books.
Well, it's already illegal for prohibited purchasers to purchase
ammunition, but we don't enforce it. So, I think that all my col-
leagues I would expect would join me in co-sponsoring Jamie's Law,
bringing it to the floor immediately so that we can actually enforce
a law already on the books instead of adding a new one.
Thank you. Practice what you preach. I yield back the balance
ofmy time.
Chair JORDAN. The gentlelady yields back.
Mr. Cummins, what was Bryan Malinowski's principal liveli-
hood?
Mr. CUMMINS. He was the highest paid city employee in the city
of Little Rock as the Executive Director of the Little Rock Airport,
and it's a matter of public record I think he made about $260,000
a year.
Chair JORDAN. So, it wasn't selling guns?
Mr. CUMMINS. No, sir. This was collecting guns was a hobby.
Chair JORDAN. The law at the time says if your principal liveli-
hood is not in selling firearms you do not need an FFL. Is that ac-
curate?
Mr. CUMMINS. That's my understanding to the best you can have
an understanding.
Chair JORDAN. So, what was the crime? What did he do wrong?
Mr. CUMMINS. You'd have to ask ATF. They decided that he com-
mitted-maybe had committed a crime even though-
Chair JORDAN. Now, the standard has changed but the new rule
didn't take effect until this past Monday. Is that right?
Mr. CUMMINS. That's correct.
Chair JORDAN. Even under the new standard there was a ques-
tion of whether he was in violation of the law. Is that accurate?
Mr. CUMMINS. A huge question.
Chair JORDAN. Huge question. Under the old standard it was
pretty simple-is your principal livelihood selling firearms.
Mr. CUMMINS. That's correct.
Chair JORDAN. For Bryan Malinowski it wasn't?
Mr. CUMMINS. Obviously not.
Chair JORDAN. It wasn't, and yet at 6:02, March 19th, 10 cars
pull up to his home and to the gentlelady behind your's home, come
up to the door in tactical gear and put a tape across the doorbell
camera, so no one can see what's going to go on.
Mr. CUMMINS. Correct.
Chair JORDAN. Now, that's scary to me.
Mr. CUMMINS. Probably scary to everyone.
Chair JORDAN. Now, if the guy had done-if he had for sure done
something wrong, a crime, OK. They do that and then 57 seconds
later gunshots erupt and Bryan Malinowski is no longer with us,
a good man by your-you knew the guy. Served your community.
Highest paid city official in Little Rock. What the heck do you
think's going on here?
Mr. CUMMINS. That's the question on the lips of every person in
Arkansas that's contacted me and that's a large number of people.
Chair JORDAN. Isn't it true that a week before these same agents
were there in the Wal-Mart parking lot close by the Malinowski
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 129 of 236

43

home, going to go execute the search warrant and then decided not
to because Bryan Malinowski wasn't home? Why was this so crit-
ical that he'd be home?
Mr. CUMMINS. I don't know, Mr. Chair. It was a search warrant.
In fact, they could have waited until nobody was home and come-
they wanted to kick the door down. They could have come at noon
and kicked the door down, when Maer and Bryan were both gone.
Chair JORDAN. Searched and found whatever they were looking
for.
Mr. CUMMINS. Exactly.
Chair JORDAN. Anything they wanted on Mr. Malinowski-if they
wanted his phone or anything they could have served that warrant.
They could have got a warrant for that. I'm sure the judge would
have given it to them, and they could have done that at the air-
port-at his principal livelihood at the airport, correct?
Mr. CUMMINS. Correct.
Chair JORDAN. Then, to add insult to injury-this is the part that
just-I know infuriates Mr. Hill as your Member of Congress and
I would bet any American-to add insult to injury, the way they
treated his spouse, Ms. Malinowski, sitting behind you, the way
they treated her at a moment that may be the most high-anxiety
moment in any individual's life. Their spouse has just been shot.
That to me is unbelievable what she had to go through.
Mr. CUMMINS. It makes me very angry.
Chair JORDAN. Well, it should. It should make all of us angry.
I think it makes the Democrats-there's no-there's no explanation
for that. That to me-and if you-and I keep coming back to was
this done for some kind of-we have seen this from other agencies,
frankly-intimidation.
We had the FBI-Mr. Houck, come in, arrest him in front of his
wife and children. Same thing. Predawn raid, seven kids there, and
take him away. When his attorney said, we'll be happy to work
with you, you would have been happy to work with these guys if
they had contacted you or any-
Mr. CUMMINS. Absolutely.
Chair JORDAN. That's the part that gets us. That's the part
that-what was his principal livelihood? It was not selling fire-
arms. I can't figure out what the crime is.
By the way, any of the guns-any of the firearms that Mr.
Malinowski sold as part of his hobby-excuse me-any of them
ever be used-were any of them ever used in a crime?
Mr. CUMMINS. The affidavit alleges that they were-they were
found in crimes, but the crimes were three traffic stops where there
was marijuana and a firearm in the car. So, that was a crime. Two
other ones but they were never fired in the commission of a crime.
Chair JORDAN. The guns themselves were never used in a crime.
Mr. CUMMINS. They were never used in the commission of a
crime according to the affidavit.
Chair JORDAN. Yes. You asked it in your testimony. You said the
right thing. Why? Why did they do it? Why did this happen? That's
what we're going to try to find out and tomorrow Mr. Dettelbach
will be sitting right where you guys are sitting, and we're going to
ask him questions about this.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 130 of 236

44
He's probably going to say ongoing investigation, but we're going
to push him as hard as we can. We're trying to figure out why they
would behave in this way and why they didn't wear body cams.
It's almost like, what are they trying to hide? Cover up the door-
bell and no body cams. What are they trying to hide? We'll get to
those questions tomorrow. I see my time has expired.
I will now recognize the gentleman from Massachusetts, Mr.
Lynch.
Mr. LYNCH. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
So, as a Member of the House Oversight Committee, I strongly
supported the independent investigations years ago of operations
conducted by the ATF and that included Operation Fast and Furi-
, ous and Operation Wide Receiver by the Department of Justice.
• I also believe that under the circumstances surrounding the
death of Mr. Malinowski, we should also institute a full and inde-
pendent review.
However, like Ms. Sampson, I do not agree with the ad hominem
attacks on our ATF agents and law enforcement personnel. I was
here in 2002, when President George Bush-George W. Bush, ex-
cuse me-reestablished the ATF within the Department of Justice
and he did that for all the right reasons, I believe.
We had a mission to protect communities from violent criminals,
criminal organizations, and also we needed to get at the problem
of the illegal use and trafficking of firearms.
To this end the A';I'F regularly, to my experience, works with
local and State law enforcement agencies nationwide to reduce gun
violence, a national crisis that's affected each of our communities.
In my own district which includes part of the city of Boston the
ATF Boston field division recently partnered with the Boston Police
Department, the Suffolk County Sheriffs Office, the Suffolk County
District Attorney's Office, and the U.S. Attorney's Office on a new
initiative to combat the flow of illegal guns and the incidence of
violent crimes using those guns.
In particular, the Boston Firearm Intelligence Review Shooting
and Trafficking program or the Boston First program was devel-
oped to deploy State of the art ShotSpotter technology or tracking
tech-ballistics tracking technology is another term-to assist a
law enforcement agency in reviewing shooting incidents and fire-
arms trace data to take illegal guns and violent criminals off the
street and also to respond more quickly to those incidents of gun
violence.
The ATF Boston field division also participates in several critical
multi-agency task forces within our State and our city. A perfect
example of what that collaboration can do is we had a shootout at
my local park.
So, I grew up in the housing projects. We have a park across the
street. We have got-it's heavily, heavily used, the second most
heavily used park in the city, and we had a shootout between two
rival gangs and it was during a couple of lacrosse games-a la-
crosse tournament and a basketball tournament-and it ended up
in a situation where moms and dads had to lay on top of the bodies
of their kids to prevent them from being shot.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 131 of 236

45
There were only 60 shots fired. It only lasted a couple of minutes
but that couple of minutes felt like a couple of hours to those par-
ents trying to protect their kids.
So, we were able to with the help of the ATF and Boston police,
the l<'BI, the DEA, who I asked to get involved as well, and also
police departments from Boston, the city of Brockton, Quincy,
Stoughton, to begin to attack that problem and bring in some of
that technology to reduce the likelihood of that happening again.
I'm very thankful. I'm thankful for my ATF agents and law en-
forcement personnel for the job that they do. It's not easy.
Ms. Sampson, if you could talk a little bit about last week we
had-you wouldn't believe it, but we had law enforcement officers'
National Police Week where we show appreciation.
Now, we're going after them. Could you further discuss the ex-
tent to which ATF supports local law enforcement in preventing
gun violence and gun trafficking?
Ms. SAMPSON. Thank you.
There are a variety of forms that this takes. First, we have to
think about the context that were, in which, is epidemic gun vio-
lence.
So, we have over 44,000 people killed each year and that doesn't
account for all the shootings that happen where people are injured
or where there's just shots fired.
So, local law enforcement agencies are trying to respond in that
environment and ATF is the only Federal agency that can help
them understand, first, where are the guns coming from. They
can't figure that out without ATF.
So, every time a gun incident happens ATF is the one who tells
them where the gun came from, can help them identify suspects,
and follow those leads along.
ATF also helps law enforcement understand firearms technology
so that they can better understand what's going on in their commu-
nities, and then in terms of preventing gun violence in the first
place because gun violence is the number one cause of death for po-
lice officers ATF's work around regulating the industry and pre-
venting guns from being trafficked into communities stops gun vio-
lence before it starts, which is a huge help to local law enforce-
ment.
Mr. !SSA. [Presiding.] I thank the gentlelady. I'm sorry-
Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Chair, just so you know, the previous witness
had, like, eight minutes and so, you could extend the courtesy-
Mr. !SSA. I would ask unanimous consent the gentlelady have an
additional minute. I was not trying to short-I gave her an extra
55 seconds.
Mr. LYNCH. I don't think you were here. I don't think you were
here, Mr. Chair. Thank you.
Mr. ISSA. If you could wrap up in one minute, please.
Ms. SAMPSON. Sorry. Yes. So, to just put a finer point on it, local
law enforcement agencies could not do their work without ATF.
Mr. LYNCH. Thank you for your courtesy, Mr. Chair. I yield.
Mr. ISSA. I might recall the time the gentleman and I were in
the outback of Pakistan and the gentleman was hurt in a sniper
fire. So, we go back a long way on gun safety.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 132 of 236

46
The gentleman is correct that we do need the Alcohol, Tobacco,
and Fire. We definitely do need ATF.
Mr. Graham, thank you for your decades of service. You, obvi-
ously, stayed there because of your dedication to the very mission
that we're talking about today of making sure that guns are not
in the hands of people who are not entitled to have them or may
misuse them. Is that correct?
Mr. GRAHAM. That's correct, Chair.
Mr. ISSA. So, in that dedication in 37 years you've seen some zigs
and zags. Can you talk about what you've seen or saw that might
have changed in the last few years that concerns you?
Mr. GRAHAM. Certainly. From a field investigator perspective all
the way through the first and second level of supervision I've per-
sonally conducted field inspections to where errors were disclosed
on an 4473. That is the transaction record that individuals buy-
complete when they buy firearms through a Federal firearms li-
censee.
What concerns me is with the zero-tolerance policy ATF has had
a long-standing administrative action policy that did address li-
censees' level of compliance or the level of violations in compliance
with the code of Federal regulation and through the inspections
they were given an opportunity. Those violations that weren't di-
rectly linked to public safety; those were corrected.
Mr. ISSA. So, let me just interrupt you briefly. So, what you're
saying is that in the past your job was to get maximum compliance
knowing that mistakes are made, but that changed in 2021, didn't
it?
Mr. GRAHAM. Most certainly. It put a lot of focus where there
was minimal latitude allowed with the zero-tolerance policy. How-
ever, there was the exception of presenting extraordinary cir-
cumstances. However, those were to be discussed during a held
hearing at the various division levels.
Mr. ISSA. Is that necessary? In other words, prior to 2021 do you
believe that compliance with a clear threat of both the cost that
comes with going to court and the possibility of losing that valuable
license was sufficient to get a vast majority of people to make every
effort to comply?
Mr. GRAHAM. Providing that the violations, Chair, did not have
a direct nexus to criminal activity the FFLs were provided an op-
portunity to remediate.
Basically, it's the investigator's job to ensure that the records
that are executed are fully compliant simply because it's those
records that criminal enforcement uses to trace a firearm to the
last known legal possessor, and if those records are inaccurate, it
could, perhaps, affect how a warrant is served, who the individual
is that may be, perhaps, looked at.
So, prior to 2021 there were opportunities using the administra-
tive action program to address violations that were found at a Fed-
eral firearms licensee given the previous inspection history consid-
ered in the entire process.
Mr. ISSA. Let me just give a couple of quick questions and you
may be not the only one that wants to answer it. Certainly, during
the Obama Administration Operation Fast and Furious went
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 133 of 236

47
counter to everything you normally did, allowing more than 2,000
weapons to end up in the cartels' hands.
That was a deviation from any sensible thing that you saw dur-
ing most of your 37 years. That was, quite frankly, not what hap-
pened during the next four years after President Obama.
The question is should your agency be able to operate substan-
tially the same without regard to who happens to be in the White
House and should your mission be more consistent and, in fact,
looking at what happened with Fast and Furious, what happened
in the Obama Administration as an attack on guns and particu-
larly on their ability to collect money, which was a separate pro-
gram, versus the four-years of President Trump and the eight
years of President Bush before that, and now President Obama-
President Eiden.
Do you see kind of a back and forth that reeks in general of poli-
tics rather than your being able to do your job in a consistent way?
You can comment on any of these Administrations you feel appro-
priate.
Mr. GRAHAM. Quite frankly, Chair, I have no comment to make
on Fast and Furious. That was a criminal enforcement endeavor.
As far as their regulatory perspective is concerned, you have both
ATF agents and industry operation investigators that are dedicated
to upholding the United States Code, as well as a Code of Federal
Regulations.
When there are changes it not only affects how the investigators
deploy their onsite inspections-compliance inspections-of a Fed-
eral firearms licensee but on the industry member themselves.
There is a lot of back and forth, there's a lot of confusion, and
going back to the zero-tolerance policy did create confusion as to
last year or a few years prior, I may have been inspected.
However, I wasn't cited for whatever that Code of Federal Regu-
lations citation was. However, this year during the current inspec-
tion because of this new directive they are being pursued for rev-
ocation.
Mr. ISSA. OK I want just a yes or no from anyone-hopefully,
everyone very quickly. In what happened that the Chair was talk-
ing about a few minutes ago should this Committee seek to man-
date body cams anytime potential lethal force is being used in any
ATF operation? Yes or no.
Mr. CLECKNER. Yes.
Mr. GRAHAM. Yes.
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes.
Mr. CUMMINS. Yes.
Mr. ISSA. Thank you. That was a yes, ma'am?
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes.
Mr. ISSA. I got four yeses. I'll take it. We now go to the gen-
tleman from Virginia, Mr. Connolly.
That is hard to get but I will take yes for an answer. Mr. Con-
nolly?
Mr. CONNOLLY. I say yes too, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Cummins, I just want to clarify something in your testimony.
You heard my colleague from New York entered into the record the
actual warrant which was not a no-knock warrant.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 134 of 236

48
Is it still your testimony that what occurred-the tragedy that
occurred with Mr. Malinowski and his family was a no-knock war-
rant?
Mr. CUMMINS. Because body cameras weren't worn, and the door-
bell camera was covered up we don't know what happened at the
front door.
I would say based on what we do know that 57 seconds I de-
scribed minus the time to allow for Mr. Malinowski to respond to
the crash in the door and whatever time it took them to knock on
the door, if they knocked after they covered up the door-we know
that it was 20 or 30 seconds, and my answer is there's a distinction
without a difference. All you hear is a crash.
Mr. CONNOLLY. All right. For the record-
Mr. CUMMINS. What do you know?
Mr. CONNOLLY. For the record, you're a lawyer.
Mr. CUMMINS. Yes.
Mr. CONNOLLY. The warrant filed was not a no-knock warrant.
Mr. CUMMINS. Not on its face. No, sir.
Mr. CONNOLLY. That's right. Thank you. Just wanted to clarify
that.
Ms. Sampson, Mr. Cummins described really a horror that
should not occur to any American citizen or American resident. Is
there, however, distinctions in the solution?
The solution before us today is abolish the agency because they
engaged in behavior that was brutal or violent or beyond accept-
able norms. Do you believe that's the solution?
Ms. SAMPSON. Absolutely not.
Mr. CONNOLLY. So, the very same people who condemned those
who called for that solution with the Minneapolis Police Depart-
ment after the George Floyd tragedy have a different solution
today for ATF.
For some reason this particular police force ought to be abolished
and no other, even if they also engage in violent behavior, brutal
brutality, and violation of the law. Do you note the irony?
Ms. SAMPSON. I do, and with respect to the ongoing investigation
that's not what my area of expertise is. We, of course, believe in
accountability because we live in a democracy. So, there should be
accountability and investigation.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Right. The solution isn't to abolish the agency.
Ms. SAMPSON. Exactly.
Mr. CONNOLLY. In fact, the agency has some very important mis-
sions, as Chair Issa just indicated. He said, "no, we need ATF." I
agree with him. Reform it? Yes. Abolish it? Very different kind of
answer.
What would happen if we abolished the ATF? What kinds of con-
sequences might flow from that?
Ms. SAMPSON. There will be consequences for all Americans.
First and foremost, we would lose the only Federal agency respon-
sible for making sure that firearms are not trafficked into our
streets.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Ah, maybe that's why some people don't like the
ATF, that particular charge-that they don't want regulation of
arms of any kind, and they don't like the Federal agency that has
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 135 of 236

49
that m1ss10n, which may be why for so many years they have
blocked the confirmation of an ATF director.
Ms. SAMPSON. That could be. All I know is that ATF is the only
Federal agency that we had and we're dealing with epidemic gun
violence.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Well, let's look at that. So, if we abolish it would
that make it easier for criminal cartels to traffic firearms in this
country?
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes.
Mr. CONNOLLY. If we abolish it would that, in fact, strengthen
Mexican cartels engaged in human trafficking, drug trafficking,
and arms trafficking?
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Would we expect more assault weapons to be
funneled to the Black market if some of my colleagues succeeded
in abolishing the ATF?
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Could it affect violent crime in the United
States?
Ms. SAMPSON. Absolutely.
Mr. CONNOLLY. How so?
Ms. SAMPSON. Well, ATF right now, as I said, they are respon-
sible for regulating the industry and so we know that most-almost
every gun starts out in the legal market, and it's funneled from the
legal market, which are FFLs who are regulated by ATF, into the
illegal market.
So, if ATF is no longer there then that channel, which is already
larger than it should be, would overwhelmingly increase and we
would have more guns and more gun violence.
Mr. CONNOLLY. So, if we abolish ATF as the Chair of the Select
Committee, not Mr. Issa, want to do and that is supported by an
agency that gave him an A+ rating in Gun Owners of America that
actually sells merchandise calling for abolish the ATF-if we did
that it's your testimony-I don't want to put words in your
mouth-that it would actually make Americans less safe and would
remove the only Federal agency charged with trying to protect
them from firearm violence and trafficking in America?
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes, that is true.
Mr. CONNOLLY. Thank you. I yield back.
Mr. ISSA. I thank the gentleman.
We now go to the gentleman from Florida, Mr. Gaetz, for five
minutes.
Mr. GAETZ. Mr. Cleckner, what is the ATF's zero tolerance pol-
icy?
Mr. CLECKNER. It is a change in how they used to enforce viola-
tions of the law against FFLs to no longer allow them to fix errors
or to improve their compliance. It has no tolerance for these typos
and wants to revoke their licenses.
Mr. GAETZ. Give me a flavor of the type of errors that might have
previously resulted in the ATF working with a license holder and
now would result in the agency trying to revoke that license.
Mr. CLECKNER. I'd love to give you the examples that fly in the
face of what the zero-tolerance policy says it is, which is prohibited
persons and background checks and things like that.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 136 of 236

50
The problem is my client did none of those things that are even
stated in the zero-tolerance policy and they're still falling subject
to getting revoked. We can talk about a typo, or an abbreviation
of somebody's name when they shouldn't have done that.
We can talk about accidentally listing United States as the coun-
try instead of paying attention to the box saying county. Things
like that.
Mr. GAETZ. Ms. Sampson gave testimony that these are essen-
tial-that these are necessary regulations to enforce at the finest
point. Do you have a response to that testimony?
Mr. CLECKNER. Some are essential, I agree-the background
check requirements, the identification requirements, and making
sure we know who the purchaser is, that they're not a prohibited
person.
That's not what this exact case I'm dealing with has to do with
at all. There are no prohibited persons involved here. There were
no missing background checks. There was no missing anything that
would actually affect public safety.
Mr. GAETZ. In the case I'm aware of in my district, the error
wasn't even made by the license holder. The error was made by the
Florida Department of Law Enforcement because they were
charged with a certain feature of the background check.
So, if a license holder has to rely on a State entity to do some
portion of the check and they make an error that certainly
shouldn't result in the license holder experiencing a revocation ac-
tion, should it?
Mr. CLECKNER. We agree it should not.
Mr. GAETZ. Yet, that's the circumstance and I'm wondering just
how you hear that testimony, Mr. Cummins, as you deal with rep-
resenting a family that's dealt with such loss at the hands of such
a grave error. Does the hypocrisy not ring pretty loud?
Mr. CUMMINS. I've been on all sides of this. I've been a United
States Attorney. I've prosecuted more gun crimes than probably
many prosecutors in the country. It was the number one priority
in the Bush Administration to prosecute gun crime. Not adminis-
trative gun crime, real gun crime.
People that are out committing crimes with guns, and we pros-
ecuted a whole bunch of them. I've also been a defense attorney
and I've been with families and people that are in prison.
I've been to prisons and met with people. Anybody that thinks
that the guns that are being sold in private sales are driving the
level of crime we're seeing in our community, on the list of things
that are driving the level of crime we see in our community private
gun sales is way down at the bottom and there's a great number
of other things that aren't being discussed here at all that have to
be driving it more than-
Mr. GAETZ. I want you to be able to respond specifically to Ms.
Sampson's testimony that guns make their way from the legal mar-
ketplace to the illegal marketplace, because it seems to me hearing
that testimony that then you wouldn't attack the people who are
trying to legally engage in the legal transfer of firearms, right.
You would go after the people engaging in illegal conduct. What's
your reaction to that testimony?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 137 of 236

51
Mr. CUMMINS. I agree with that. I think gun crimes are com-
mitted by people, not guns, and we need to focus on the people that
are committing the crimes, and we need to be asking ourselves,
why is this person a criminal-what's their background.
I know the answers to a lot of those questions because I've been
living it for 35 years. It doesn't really have much to do with where
they acquired the firearm.
Mr. GAETZ. Everything we know about the law for someone to be
a criminal they have to have the intent to commit a crime. That's
the mens rea, right?
Mr. CUMMINS. Correct.
Mr. GAETZ. Do you worry as you look at some of the ways in
which these laws are being weaponized against people that we're
getting away from someone actually wanting to commit a crime
and, indeed, people are experiencing this really, really harsh regu-
latory action when they want to be legally compliant?
Mr. CUMMINS. I would suggest that the tactics that were used in
the Malinowski search would be incompetent and reckless if it was
a very serious crime. It's even much more offensive because this is
not a serious crime that they suspected. It's probably the lowest
level crime that would ever be drug into a United States Attorney's
office.
Mr. GAETZ. So why did this happen? Is this just to send a mes-
sage? Is this someone's incompetence? Do you wonder about that?
Mr. CUMMINS. I wonder about it, and that's probably a question
for this Committee to answer, not me. I'm certainly concerned
about it, and it makes this tragedy even harder to take to think
that it might be politically motivated or for some other reason.
Mr. GAETZ. Thank you. I see I'm out of time. I yield back.
Mr. STEUBE. [Presiding.] The gentleman's time has expired. I
now recognize Ms. Plaskett for five minutes.
Ms. PLASKETT. Thank you very much.
First, I want to say it's very interesting that we keep talking
about the fact that there were no body cams on the ATF officers
that were there to execute that warrant.
What's very interesting-and I'd like to admit and submit into
the record a letter that's been sent from ATF to Mr. Jim Jordan
dated May 21, 2024, from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Fire-
arms and Explosives.
Mr. STEUBE. Without objection.
Ms. PLASKETT. Thank you. In that letter, it reminds this Con-
gress that in 2021, the department directed its law enforcement
components including ATF to develop plans for a phased implemen-
tation of body worn cameras.
The very thing that they're trying to do, which is to eliminate the
ATF, is the reason that they don't have body cams, because they
didn't give them the funding for it. Congress has specifically stated
in its appropriations that they don't want to fund ATF.
They don't want to give them the money to be able to operate.
They don't want to give Mr. Cleckner's clients sufficient ATF offi-
cers to be able to quickly do the kind of paperwork that they need.
That's why they're taking so long. They don't want to give them
the funding to be able to have body cams and so ATF has only a
third of its individuals who are wearing body cams, and I have spe-
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 138 of 236

52
cifically requested from Congress the funding so that everyone can
wear those body cams and my colleagues have denied that.
They're the ones who have said they don't need that money. Let's
get rid of ATF. They have legislation to abolish the ATF, the Elimi-
nation of the ATF Act-Abolish the ATF Act and eliminate this
woke, wea·ponized agency-everything's woke when you don't like
it-eliminate it and that way these are the reasons.
So, they want to have it both ways. They want to say that they
don't have body cams and that's the reason they're-we feel sorry
for people who haven't had the body cams.
They're the reason they don't have them. Point it right back at
yourself why those body cams weren't on them and see if that con-
tinues to work for you.
We're also talking about another thing that was discussed, which
I found very interesting was that individuals who are doing this as
hobbies.
One of the reasons that we changed the rule to the engaged in
business rule is because an individual who can have as his primary
income a large income can then sell a lot of firearms and not be
considered a firearms dealer because their primary income is more
than the firearms income that they're doing, even if it's voluminous
the amount of firearm sales that they're making if their primary
income level is higher.
So, a couple years ago in 2022 President Biden signed the bipar-
tisan Safer Communities Act which has as one of its rules, a rule
with regard to no longer can an individual hide the fact that they
are by all accounts, by a common law person's account, an actual
firearms dealer and not a hobbyist.
One of the ways I would look at determining if, in fact, a person
is a hobbyist as opposed to a firearms dealer is-Ms. Sampson, in
your opinion is someone who buys and then almost immediately re-
sells at least 150 firearms in a three-year period a hobbyist or an
unlicensed gun dealer?
Ms. SAMPSON. If that is what a person was doing then they
would be more likely to be an unlicensed gun dealer.
Ms. PLASKETT. Is it concerning to you if someone sells 150 fire-
arms and conducts no background check on the individuals who are
purchasing those firearms?
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes, because ATF data shows that those unli-
censed and unbackground-checked sales usually end up going to
prohibited purchasers.
Ms. PLASKETT. I'd like to submit for the record the actual search
warrant-the unsealed application for a search warrant and the af-
fidavit and other information therein which on page 28 states that
as of February 27, 2024, approximately six firearms are known to
have been recovered in the commission of crimes. Those are related
to the firearms that Mr. Malinowski purchased and then sold.
Mr. CUMMINS. Mr. Chair, could 1-
Ms. PLASKETT. No, I'm speaking. It's my time.
Mr. CUMMINS. OK. I'm sorry.
Ms. PLASKETT. OK. Thank you. Then, in your opinion, Ms. Samp-
son, would ATF be justified in being concerned when someone sells
a firearm to an individual who has been convicted of robbery and
is prohibited from owning a gun?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 139 of 236

53
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes, because selling to a prohibited purchaser is
a violation of the law.
Ms. PLASKE'IT. In your opinion, would ATF be justified in being
concerned-
Chair JORDAN. [Presiding.] The time of the gentlelady-the time
of the gentlelady-
Ms. PLASKE'IT. -when selling a firearm that lands in the hands
of a 15-year-old member of the Norteno criminal street gang?
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes.
Ms. PLASKEIT. Thank you. I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentlelady yields back.
Mr. Cummins, I think Mr. Steube will give you a chance to re-
spond.
Mr. STEUBE. Mr. Cummins, did you want to respond to that?
Mr. CUMMINS. I just wanted to quickly say-
Ms. PLASKE'IT. Is this his time now?
Chair JORDAN. Yes, it's his time.
Ms. PLASKE'IT. OK.
Mr. CUMMINS. The Ranking Member made a misstatement that's
been repeated in the press and I'd just like to correct it.
That affidavit refers to approximately-I think it's 142 but call
it 150 guns-that Mr. Malinowski purchased over four years, which
I can tell you-I could name a lot of people in Arkansas that have
bought 150 firearms in four years. It only documents six, I believe,
sales of any firearms in that affidavit, not 150. It only-it docu-
ments that he purchased 150 guns, but it only documents that he
sold about six.
Chair JORDAN. Which you're allowed to do in America, right?
Mr. CUMMINS. As far as I know.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman is recognized.
Mr. STEUBE. This whole case is outrageous to me and, Ms.
Malinowski, I feel like we owe you an apology on behalf of the
American government today because ATF isn't going to give you
that apology.
So, we'll do it today on behalf of our government who just-I'm
kind of uniquely situated. I have a military background, but my fa-
ther's a retired sheriff, did 20 years on the SWAT team, executed
countless search warrants.
My brother's 10 years -on the SWAT team, still on the force, exe-
cuted countless search warrants and you have conversations with
them. I have a military background so I kind of understand clear-
ing a room and that sort of thing, and when they execute a search
warrant, they would wait until the individual wasn't at their home
where they knew that there was a firearm present to avoid a situa-
tion where one of their officers were injured.
Your testimony is and it's in the record that they followed Mr.
Malinowski. They knew where he worked. Mr. Gaetz made a very
good point that he worked at an airport, a secure environment
where it would have been very easy to go in and execute a search
warrant, and if they were going to arrest him or question him do
that there were there were no weapons involved. It would have
been peaceful.
Did ATF ever serve him with an administrative cease and desist
letter?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 140 of 236

54

Mr. CUMMINS. No, sir.

Mr. STEUBE. Did he have any-
Mr. CUMMINS. Not to my knowledge.
Mr. STEUBE. Did he have any knowledge or understanding that
he was being investigated for any type of crime?
Mr. CUMMINS. Well, obviously, he's not available for me to ask
that question to but to the best of my knowledge and based on our
investigation the answer is no.
Mr. STEUBE. You and his wife, obviously.
Mr. CUMMINS. Yes, sir.
Mr. STEUBE. Since Malinowski did not receive a cease-and-desist
letter did he ever get any other-well, I just asked that.
In the ATF search warrant application agents indicate that they
talked to him on February 8th, just over a month prior to the raid.
The agents indicate that he attempted to elude them.
Is there any indication that Mr. Malinowski was ever aware that
the people following him were law enforcement officers?
Mr. CUMMINS. No. That portion of the affidavit is comical.
Mr. STEUBE. Would you like to expand?
Mr. CUMMINS. Maybe more-maybe embarrassed. It's an irrele-
vant portion in the affidavit where they talk about traffic and try
to follow him. It sounds like somebody that isn't a very good driver
to me.
I'm familiar with the area that they're describing, and everybody
is in jeopardy when they make that transition. It has nothing to
do with this case.
Mr. STEUBE. Again, it was, like, 6:00 in the morning. So, he
doesn't know he's being investigated. There's no, like, letter that's
sent that you need to cease and desist of what you're doing or we
would like to have a conversation with you.
It sits hard with me because I would react the exact same way.
If somebody beat my door in at 6:00 in the morning, I can guar-
antee you myself and my wife would be approaching the door with
a firearm.
So, it's not-and you would think that the ATF agents would also
conclude that that's a reasonable response to your door getting
beaten in at 6:00 a.m., when you don't know you're being inves-
tigated. Does ATF typically have body cams? Does the Little Rock
Police Department typically have body cameras?
Mr. CUMMINS. Interestingly, according to my understanding Lit-
tle Rock police does wear body cams, but they didn't have them on
that morning and so they were under the supervision of ATF, and
you have to ask ATF why Little Rock didn't have theirs on.
Mr. STEUBE. Little Rock typically does have body cams and,
again, my experience with my family they have body cams and if
they would have turned them off in the execution of a search war-
rant that would be a very big problem for any law enforcement
agent that is involved in an execution of a search warrant with no
body cameras-
Mr. CUMMINS. That's one of the specific times they'd be required
to have them on.
Mr. STEUBE. Did ATF ever have an opportunity to serve this
search warrant at a time when it would have been less dangerous?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 141 of 236

55
Mr. CUMMINS. Probably a thousand opportunities that we could
sit here and speak.
Mr. STEUBE. I've only got-I'm just outraged. Mr. Goldman said
that it was a no-knock-it was not a no-knock warrant and you
stated that there was, like, 47 seconds or something.
So, if they did knock at 6:00 in the morning it's reasonable that
the Malinowskis didn't hear that because you wouldn't be ap-
proaching-if somebody knocked on my door at 6:00 in the morn-
ing, I wouldn't assume that it's a bad guy because they wouldn't
knock.
If you hear a door beaten in at 6:00 in the morning, there was
such a short period of time between the door getting kicked in and
knocked in, and then Mr. Malinowski being shot that it's reason-
able to believe that they didn't hear the knock if there was a knock,
which I'm looking forward to the Judiciary Committee asking all
these questions.
I hope that the Chair is going to ask for and I know they have
asked for every officer that was present that day because I would
love for this Committee with the oversight authority that we have
over the ATF to depose every single one of those officers that were
present that day and get a sworn deposition from every single one
of those people.
Again, Ms. Malinowski, I'm sorry for your loss and the loss of
your family to a clear abuse of the rule of law, in my opinion.
I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair now recognizes-the gentleman from New York is rec-
ognized.
Mr. GoLDMAN. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First, I want to express my condolences to Ms. Malinowski. I'm
terribly sorry for your loss and for what you had to endure that
day.
I do want to get into some of the details because I think they're
very important. It was actually the search warrant affidavit, with-
out going into great detail, demonstrates that Mr. Malinowski did
purchase 142 guns from 2019 to February 27, 2024.
He resold at least nine because we have the six plus the three
to the undercover firearm. He also had at various times at various
gun shows 12 or 13 firearms on the table to be sold and he offered
one witness, who was the one convicted of robbery and therefore
was a prohibited person, many more firearms than what he pur-
chased.
Many of these firearms were purchased just days before they
were sold. So, whether or not you want to assert, Mr. Cummins,
that this was a hobby of his you agree that there's certainly prob-
able cause to believe that he was selling guns to individuals with-
out a license and without performing a background check because
he didn't have a license?
Mr. CUMMINS. There's no allegation that he knowingly sold a gun
to anyone that was prohibited-
Mr. GOLDMAN. That's not what probable cause-
Mr. CUMMINS. -and under ATF's interpretation of-
Mr. GoLDMAN. You don't have to-you don't have to do that. I
just said that he-
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 142 of 236

56
Mr. CUMMINS. I'm just answering your question.
Mr. GOLDMAN. Selling without a license. Like, there's certainly
probable cause that he was in the business of selling without a li-
cense.
Mr. CUMMINS. Under ATF's interpretation of a vague, vague reg-
ulation.
Mr. GOLDMAN. Not yours. So, you would say that if you purchase
142 firearms within a four-year span as a former U.S. attorney and
you have evidence of nine sales within that period of time plus
many other more weapons offered for sale, you would say as you,
not the ATF-as you as a former U.S. attorney that there is no
probable cause to believe that this person is in the business of sell-
ing guns without a license?
Mr. CUMMINS. I would agree that this could be probable cause.
Mr. GOLDMAN. Thank you. So, we have probable cause. The Lit-
tle Rock police are there with the ATF. They go in and the one fact
that doesn't ever seem to be mentioned here, and that the Chair's
letter does not mention is that an ATF agent was shot. Is that cor-
rect, Mr. Cummins?
Mr. CUMMINS. That's correct.
Mr. GOLDMAN. OK. So, an ATF agent was shot and then in re-
sponse fired back at Mr. Malinowski. Is that accurate?
Mr. CUMMINS. That is accurate and it's also a tragedy.
Mr. GOLDMAN. It is a tragedy. I agree. I agree. You also agree,
I assume-I was an Assistant U.S. Attorney for 10 years, secured
many, many search warrants, oversaw the execution of them and
arrest warrants. They're routinely done at 6 a.m. Is that right?
Mr. CUMMINS. A lot of warrants are executed at 6 a.m. Whether
I agree with that as a tactic is another discussion. Yes, that's not
uncommon.
Mr. GOLDMAN. Yes. No, OK, I want to understand that we're
making a big deal out of the 6 a.m. here, but that is the standard
time that law enforcement executes arrest warrants and executes
search warrants.
So, I certainly am sorry that this is a tragedy that Mr.
Malinowski died. I'm also sorry that Mr. Malinowski shot an ATF
agent during a search, and I think if he were truly not in the busi-
ness of selling firearms the way to respond to a search warrant is
to allow your house to be searched and to cooperate.
It is insane to me that we are sitting here criticizing the ATF be-
cause they retaliated with deadly force after someone shot an
agent. That is what happened here. This was not an out of the or-
dinary execution of a search warrant. This is a standard operating
procedure.
Mr. Cummins acknowledges that there was probable cause to do
it and now there is an investigation of this incident. Is that right,
Mr. Cummins?
Mr. CUMMINS. There has been an investigation that's been hand-
ed over to the local prosecutor.
Mr. GoLDMAN. So, the local prosecutor is investigating it, and as
a prosecutor that none of the witnesses or the relevant people in-
volved are allowed to discuss this publicly while an investigation
is going on, correct?
Mr. CUMMINS. I don't know what the policy of ATF is on that.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 143 of 236

57
Mr. GOLDMAN. Well, was it your policy as a prosecutor? It cer-
tainly was mine. Witnesses do not talk to the public while there's
an investigation going on.
One last question. As a U.S. Attorney did you ever send a notifi-
cation to a target of yours who's selling a hundred-who is buying
140 guns, selling at least nine of them, that, hey, you're under in-
vestigation-just a heads up?
Mr. CUMMINS. I hope I would have, yes.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman's time-
Mr. GOLDMAN. You would have? You would have reached out and
said, hey, by the way I'm investigating-
Chair JORDAN. The question was asked, and the question asked
and answered.
Mr. GOLDMAN. -so you can go ahead and destroy all and hide
all the evidence? You would have done that? You notified the tar-
gets that you would-
Mr. CUMMINS. I have.
Chair JORDAN. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. GoLDMAN. I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman from-the gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from North Carolina is recognized for five minutes.
Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Cummins, with some economies of time do you
wish to respond to the last barrage?
Mr. CUMMINS. Well, only to say that nobody disputes that when
a law enforcement is fired on that they have a right to fire back.
The point is that everything that created that situation was in-
competent, unnecessary, and reckless and it defied the law because
as a former assistant-the Fourth Amendment cases that allow ei-
ther a no-knock or what I would call a tap and go type entry with
no real waiting for someone to come to the door are only justified
by exigent circumstances that do not exist in this case.
So, in my opinion as a former U.S. Attorney this was a com-
pletely illegal search because of the forced entry and the lack of
time they gave the occupants of a fairly large home to get up at
6:00 in the morning.
The law requires them to wait for enough time-for a reasonable
amount of time for someone to come to the door and admit them
in.
Chair JORDAN. Fifty seconds is not a reasonable-
Mr. GOLDMAN. I assume the local prosecutor-
Mr. BISHOP. Whoa, whoa, whoa. My time. My time. My time.
You've had plenty.
Mr. Cummins, I appreciate that very effective rebuttal. Here is
what's interesting to me as this hearing evolves, I hear Mr. Gold-
man defending the practice that he says is engaged in every day,
and earlier on the Ranking Member invoked the Breonna Taylor
episode and I've just been sitting here reviewing it.
Mr. Goldman said earlier on, well, this wasn't a no-knock war-
rant. OK. What's the difference in the situation if they knock and
they blow in 20 seconds or it's a no-knock? In fact, in the Breonna
Taylor case that wasn't a no-knock warrant. They said they
knocked and waited 45 seconds and they went in.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 144 of 236

58
Here's something that's interesting. In the Breonna Taylor thing,
she was killed on March 13, 2020, in that-it was execution of a
search warrant just like this one.
Ms. PLASKETI'. Breonna was murdered. Murdered.
Chair JORDAN. The time belongs to the gentleman.
Mr. BISHOP. The police officer-the first police officer was fired
June 20th. In September 2020, Louisville entered into a $12 mil-
lion settlement with the family.
Have you been made any overtures by the Department of Justice
to settle liability against the government on behalf of Mr.
Malinowski's family?
Mr. CUMMINS. No, sir.
Mr. BISHOP. In September, also, one of the police officers was in-
dicted for willful endangerment or wanton endangerment and a
second officer was fired in January 2021. A third officer was retired
in April 2021.
Oh, I left out in October 2020, grand jury testimony was leaked.
Later in 2021, DOJ indicted four officers and even now is retrying
one who-for the hung jury. I don't understand the difference. I
don't understand my colleagues' reaction that this-
Ms. PLASKETI'. If you would yield, I could share the difference
with you.
Mr. BISHOP. No, you've talked for a long time. I'm going to talk
during my time.
Ms. PLASKETI'. OK. Then, I will tell you-
Mr. BISHOP. Maybe, you can provide context for your egregious
double standard. No one that I recall on the Republican side when
the Breonna-by the way, you said this was interfering in the proc-
ess to have this hearing.
The first time Congress had a hearing was in June 2020, over
the Breonna Taylor episode. There was no concern about inter-
fering. The concern was about the use of this kind of tactic to enter
unnecessarily and jeopardize people's lives. Now, suddenly that
seems to be of no concern whatsoever.
Can you account for that difference, Mr. Cummins?
Mr. CUMMINS. The facts are very similar, although that was a
drug investigation and under the case law they are allowed to go
in faster because of the potential for destruction of evidence.
Mr. BISHOP. Yes. So, in this case we're talking about conduct
that the law would say is malum prohibitum, not malum in se.
In other words, the reason they entered this residence and jeop-
ardized this entire family including Ms. Malinowski, who has no al-
legations against her, and shot this man dead is because he didn't
have the proper license for the business, they say he was engaged
in, and it's even disputed about whether he was engaged in that
business.
Mr. CUMMINS. Correct.
Mr. BISHOP. In that case Breonna Taylor's boyfriend was without
any contradiction engaging in illicit drug activity and receiving and
dealing. He was a drug dealer, and he was carrying it on in her
place of residence.
I can't account for the gross disparity except that Americans hear
a lot and I hear a lot about concern about double standard of jus-
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 145 of 236

59
tice. Is there a double standard of justice here, Mr. Cummins, in
those two episodes?
Mr. CUMMINS. There appears to be and that causes a loss of trust
in government and in these agencies.
Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Cleckner, the only place I see reaction besides
a hearing like this exposing stuff is that Attorney Generals across
the Nation have sued over the two rules-the engaging in the busi-
ness rule, that's an issue here, I guess, really, and the pistol brace
rule.
Why is that the only recourse that people have, to have State At-
torneys general file litigation?
Mr. CLECKNER. I don't understand your question, Congressman.
Are you saying that they should be-
Mr. BISHOP. My time has expired anyway. I wanted to get one
more. I've run out.
Chair JORDAN. Well, we can give you a chance if you want to re-
phrase the question.
Mr. BISHOP. Yes, if I can-thank you, Mr. Chair. If I can re-
phrase the question. Here's what I'm saying.
Congress doesn't seem to be able to do anything to press back
against this overreach, at least it hasn't, including under Repub-
lican leadership.
The only thing that seems to be available to people for the gov-
ernment to do to provide recourse, is I see State Attorney Generals
out filing lawsuits in great numbers, 21 States-in one case, 24.
Is that the only recourse that people have-can expect from their
government in response to these kinds of abuses?
Mr. CLECKNER. It apparently is the only one they have but it's
not what they should expect. We should expect that the adminis-
trative agency is reined in a little bit here.
Mr. BISHOP. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Chair JORDAN. We're trying. We're trying.
The Chair recognizes the gentlelady from Texas for five minutes.
Ms. CROCKETI. Thank you so much, Mr. Chair, and the vigorous
back and forth regarding Breonna Taylor.
First, I do appreciate you being here and your answering of the
questions. I do want to make sure that before we go down this
road, I clarify some things that were different in the Breonna Tay-
lor case.
Second, the officers were considered to have botched what took
place on that day because they fired blindly into a home, meaning
that they initiated some sort of deadly force, and the only informa-
tion that they had was allegedly that this was the place of some
sort of drug activity.
At that point in time, you ended up having her boyfriend who re-
turned fire believing that someone was breaking in. It is very dif-
ferent when you are returning fire versus initiating fire and there
was no need to do so.
In addition to that, no-knock warrants and knock warrants are
basically a couple of seconds of difference, if I'm going to be honest.
One of the things that I worked on in the State legislature was
actually making sure that we could reform no-knock warrants be-
cause it is a risk not only to the people in the homes, especially
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 146 of 236

60
in a State like Texas where everyone is allowed to have a gun, but
it's also a huge risk to law enforcement.
So, being able to do this effectively-this is dangerous work that
law enforcement engage in every single day and I do want to be
clear that I am always sorry for the loss of life. I don't care about
the race.
I don't care about any of those things and, honestly, I believe in
the criminal justice system. I believe that if someone is accused of
something they should have their day in court.
So, I do want to say that I take issue with anyone losing their
life, period, even if it's somebody that's accused of a crime and I
believe that they should go through due process and have an oppor-
tunity.
In this particular set of circumstances, we know that if somebody
shoots at me-in fact, some would argue that last week I had a col-
league that decided she wanted to shoot at me-I'm going to shoot
back and that's what happened here.
What's more frustrating for me in this hearing and what seems
to be a pattern, is that we continue to attempt to litigate pending
cases. We saw that one of the witnesses in the Trump trial.
He came and testified before us last week and then he went and
testified this week in front of the judiciary, and then we know that
this is still a pending case and I do want to afford an opportunity
for those that will be granted access to discovery, video, whatever
video doesn't exist, as well as any statements, depositions, all those
things, some folk that have access to all the information and, ulti-
mately, if this needs to go to court having a jury that will make
a decision based on the facts and the evidence.
So, with that, I want to make sure that we move onto something
else, which is the reality that-in fact, let me do this before I run
out of time.
Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record
"97Percent's Annual Gun Owner Survey," October 2023 report
which details these and other statistics pertaining to gun owners'
views on commonsense gun control policies and I'm going to go
back up to what those views are.
Chair JORDAN. Without objection.
Ms. CROCKETI'. Thank you so much.
The 97Percent, a bipartisan group of gun owners and nongun
owners which conducts research on gun safety policies, found that
with regarding to commonsense gun policies 86 percent of gun own-
ers, well over the simple majority, support keeping guns out of the
hands of violent criminals.
Seventy percent of gun owners say that they wish we would
enact some kind of gun reform. Sixty-six percent of gun owners, for
instance, think guns should be restricted on school grounds and 67
percent think that they should be restricted in government build-
ings, and I will tell you that I fall into those categories because I
am a licensed gun owner.
Yet, despite the majority of Americans and the majority of gun
owners, Republicans last week passed a bill out of the House that
eliminates States' ability to regulate firearms on private property,
government buildings, playgrounds, and gun-free school zones.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 147 of 236

61
If that's not hypocrisy I honestly don't know what is, and it
doesn't end there. As the party self-proclaiming itself as law en-
forcement's biggest advocate and supporter Republicans on this
very Committee have introduced legislation to abolish the law en-
forcement agency entirely.
Ms. Sampson, I have a few yes or no questions. I may only get
to one. Yes or no, are you familiar with the role of ATF?
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes.
Ms. CROCKETT. To your understanding the ATF is in fact law en-
forcement, correct?
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes.
Ms. CROCKETT. Does ATF duties include preventing incidents, in-
vestigating cases, and recommending prosecution for issues of vio-
lent crimes and weapons for gangs and career criminals?
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes.
Ms. CROCKETT. Narcotic traffickers?
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes.
Ms. CROCKETT. Domestic and international arms traffickers?
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes.
Ms. CROCKETT. Armed human traffickers?
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes.
Ms. CROCKETT. Terrorists?
Ms. SAMPSON. Yes.
Ms. CROCKETT. With that, I will yield.
Chair JORDAN. Bryan Malinowski was none of those. The
gentlelady yields back.
The gentlelady from Florida is recognized.
Ms. CAMMACK. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I am first and foremost very, very sorry, Ms. Malinowski. As the
wife of a SWAT medic, from one wife to another, I am deeply apolo-
getic, and I can't even begin to understand the pain and suffering
that you and your family are going through.
My husband, as I said, who is a SWAT medic, wl).en we heard
about this case, he was so thoroughly disgusted. and heartbroken.
That is truly, I believe, not a reflection on the good men and
women in law enforcement that intend to do their jobs the best
they can and we're so very sorry.
Mr. Chair, I'm also deeply disappointed that the discussion today
has been centered around ways to restrict constitutional rights to
law-abiding citizens instead of the mental health crisis that we face
in this country, which is a massive driver of crime in this -country.
Also, very little has been talked about when we're discussing the
overgrown, overly aggressive, and woefully inadequate Administra-
tive State.
So, with that, I'm going to jump right into Mr. Cleckner. Thank
you for returning back to Congress to provide testimony.
In a March 10, 2023, Judiciary Subcommittee on the Administra-
tive State you addressed the ATF stabilizing rule-brace rule. In
your testimony you said, quote,
This rule effectively gives the ATF the power to determine who is a felon
by the stroke of a bureaucrat's pen. This is not an appropriate enforcement
of law. It is tyranny.
I agree with you.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 148 of 236

62
What is sad is that in this rule, we are seeing a microcosm of
what is happening at other Federal agencies. The American people
are under assault by the Biden Administration's regulatory regime
from all corners of the Federal Government.
That is why I introduced the REINS Act. As many of you know,
the bill would address regulatory overreach by requiring every new
major rule proposed by Federal agencies be approved by Congress
before going into effect.
This is the reassertion of Article 1 authority that is how the
Founding Fathers intended, not unelected, nameless, faceless bu-
reaucrats arbitrarily dictating law. After all, we know that Ameri-
cans pay $2 trillion a year, in additional compliance costs-eco-
nomic loss-for this aggressive regulatory regime.
The stabilizing brace rule and ATF's zero tolerance policy are
prime examples of regulations that not only impose compliance
costs on firearm retailers but infringe on Americans' basic Second
Amendment rights.
So, I'm going to go down the line and I'm going to come right
back to you. Mr. Cummins, yes or no, should Federal agencies be
able to shift criminal statutes and rewrite law?
Mr. CUMMINS. No.
Ms. CAMMACK. Thank you. Ms. Sampson?
Ms. SAMPSON. That's not what happened here. They're enforcing
a Congressional rule.
Ms. CAMMACK. I did not ask that. I asked for a yes or no. Should
Federal agencies be arbitrarily able to write law?
Ms. SAMPSON. No, and that's not what happened here.
Ms. CAMMACK. Thank you. Mr. Graham?
Mr. GRAHAM. No, Congresswoman.
Ms. CAMMACK. Mr. Cleckner?
Mr. CLECKNER. No.
Ms. CAMMACK. Thank you.
Mr. Cleckner, my understanding is that this rule disregards
ATF's own approval of stabilizing braces in 2012, correct?
Mr. CLECKNER. This current zero tolerance policy rule? I'm not
sure what you're asking.
Ms. CAMMACK. Regarding how they classified the pistol braces as
an accessory, therefore, not subject to full ATF regulatory stand-
ards.
Mr. CLECKNER. Right.
Ms. CAMMACK. So, in the time since they approved them in 2012
to today ATF has done a full 180 on the issue and has chosen to
impose erroneous regulations on firearm accessories that were
originally intended for disabled veterans, correct?
Mr. CLECKNER. Uh-huh. That's true, and on which people relied
on their opinion when they were acting and they're now in trouble
for.
Ms. CAMMACK. Absolutely. The owners of these firearms would
now be committing a felony if they did not register, surrender, or
destroy the accessory?
Mr. CLECKNER. Correct, which means their right to even possess
a firearm for the rest of their life is now gone.
Ms. CAMMACK. Exactly. Did Congress ever approve this legisla-
tively?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 149 of 236

63
Mr. CLECKNER. No, ma'am.
Ms. CAMMACK. Can you quickly outline the specific penalties for
failing to register a pistol brace under this rule?
Mr. CLECKNER. Quickly, yes. Felony.
Ms. CAMMACK. Financial as well?
Mr. CLECKNER. Oh, for sure. Defending yourself, financial costs,
losing the right to protect yourself or have firearms in the future.
All those things.
Ms. CAMMACK. Right. So, now that this rule is being litigated in
the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals considering the rule has criminal
implications, can you speak to the risks associated with circum-
venting the legislative process in this case?
Mr. CLECKNER. The risks now, going forward, are even compa-
nies don't know what they're supposed to do because it changes
back and forth so many times.
I think people are afraid, as someone said earlier, about what
they're supposed to do, what they're going to get in trouble with,
whose guidance they're supposed to follow. It's all unclear.
Ms. CAMMACK. I appreciate that, and I know my time is expiring.
I have a list of questions for you, Mr. Graham, that I will submit
for the record.
I think it is clear that what we are seeing today, particularly,
under the ATF is a gross overreach, a weaponization of the Federal
Government in its true form. It's something that I think Repub-
licans, Democrats, and all Americans should be equally concerned
about.
With that, I yield.
Chair JORDAN. The gentlelady yields back.
The gentlelady from Wyoming is recognized.
Ms. HAGEMAN. I'm going to continue with that same line of ques-
tioning.
Mr. Cleckner, this Subcommittee's last hearing, in fact, was on
the Biden Administration's use of lawfare against political oppo-
nents and we have seen that play out in a variety of ways includ-
ing in the case that's been ongoing in New York City as well as
what's been happening in Georgia and Florida, etc.
Each and every ATF rule subjects more Americans to legal com-
pliance which, if ignored, even unknowingly, imposes criminal and
monetary penalties as well as additional fees and legal costs.
Mr. Cleckner, do you think that the rulemaking agenda is an at-
tempt to employ lawfare against Americans who stand for the Sec-
ond Amendment?
Mr. CLECKNER. I do.
Ms. HAGEMAN. OK If so, what does that say about where we
stand when the Biden Administration considers its citizens who be-
lieve in and adhere to the Constitution as its political enemies?
Mr. CLECKNER. That is scary if that's their motivation and it's
very difficult to comply with for sure.
Ms. HAGEMAN. In December 2023, the ATF Little Rock field of-
fice received a case referral for Mr. Malinowski. In the same month
it opened its investigation and spent the next several months
surveilling his activities including tailing him and placing trackers
on his car.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 150 of 236

64
I find this absolutely frightening that we have agencies who are
willing to go to this extent with a law-abiding citizen. The ATF
knew his movements, his schedule, where he was, and when he
was there and, therefore, the ATF knew when he was home and
when he wasn't, meaning that the ATF decided to execute the
search warrant when he was home even though they knew that he
would have firearms in the home.
In fact, Mr. Cummins, you have uncovered the fact that the ATF
team members gathered to execute the search warrant the week
before the raid, but then changed their plan when they learned
that Mr. Malinowski would not be home. In other words, they
wanted him there and they wanted him there bad.
Mr. Graham, is this standard operating procedure for the ATF to
ensure that the target is there when they executed this kind of a
search warrant or can they do it without the target being in the
home?
Mr. GRAHAM. Madam Congresswoman, unfortunately, I have no
firsthand knowledge of the warrant process and/or how they are ex-
ecuted.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Well, Mr. Cummins, what about you? Do you
think that this would be standard operating procedure to wait until
the gentleman was there at 1:00 in the morning, knowing that he
had guns, versus just going ahead and executing the search war-
rant when he wasn't there?
Mr. CUMMINS. Well, clearly, it's a search warrant. He didn't need
to be there. I think they definitely wanted him there and I think
that this does happen in Federal law enforcement quite a bit.
They want the target there because they want to surprise them,
and this is part of the reason they go at 6:00 in the morning. They
want to surprise them. They want them in their night clothes.
They want their hair to stand up.
They want them scared, angry, shocked, and then they want to
violate their Fifth Amendment right to not incriminate themselves
before they remember they have a Sixth Amendment right to call
their lawyer.
So, it's a trifecta. They want to violate three constitutional
rights-the Fourth, Fifth and Sixth-all in one scoop and in this
case, it didn't work out for them.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Well, and it seems to me that the overarching
issue here is that the government should have standards in place
to ensure the safety of all citizens in the conduct of its investiga-
tions and actions even when criminal activity is suspected.
In the case of execution of a search warrant for Mr. Malinowski
the ATF appears to have deviated from this premise and standards
which are in place and, in fact, ended up executing Mr. Malinowski
himself.
Mr. CUMMINS. That's exactly right.
Ms. HAGEMAN. The Constitution secures our rights by placing
limits on the Federal Government's power even when Americans-
an American citizen is suspected of being engaged in unlawful be-
havior.
As you just indicated, the Fourth Amendment secures citizens
against unreasonable search and seizure. The Fifth Amendment
ensures due process.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 151 of 236

65
The Sixth Amendment guarantees-has certain rights for crimi-
nal defendants and the Eighth Amendment provides against and
protects us against cruel and unusual punishment.
Mr. Cummins, is it fair to say that a responsible execution of a
search warrant is one of the primary mechanisms that we have in
place to guarantee an American's rights in criminal proceedings?
Mr. CUMMINS. I can't imagine what the British were doing to
people that would be worse than what happened to Bryan Mali-
nowski on March 19th that would have brought about the Fourth
Amendment to the Constitution.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Graham, do you have any recommendations
of how to address the situation we're describing today to ensure
that this does not happen again? What kind of reforms should Con-
gress take up to make sure that we can protect Mr. Malinowski
and other people like him?
Mr. GRAHAM. Madam Congresswoman, once again, having lim-
ited exposure to the warrant process and/or the execution, I would
defer to Congress creating whatever laws, regulations, they deem
appropriate to be delegated to the appropriate enforcement agency.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Cleckner, what about you? What rec-
ommendations would you have?
Mr. CLECKNER. I agree with Mr. Graham. I think Congress' over-
sight here is really important. I think what you asked me earlier
about the Administrative overreach is these Administrative agen-
cies specifically going against what Congress has put into place like
the Gun Control Act or like the willfulness requirement.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Between the bump stocks and the pistol braces
and those things what we have are agencies who are intentionally
adopting vague rules and regulations to criminalize lawful and un-
constitutional conduct. It needs to end.
I appreciate you all being here. I am sorry for your loss as well,
Ms. Malinowski. We have to expose these types of activities so that
we can prevent them from happening in the future.
With that, I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentlelady yields back.
I would just let the witnesses know we have just a few more min-
utes. Mr. Davidson, I don't know if Mr. Fry will be able to join us,
and then a couple of comments or minutes with Ms. Plaskett, the
Ranking Member, and myself and then we'll be done. So, if you
need a break, obviously, let us know but we should be done here
in the next lfive minutes is sort of the goal.
The gentleman from Ohio is recognized.
Mr. DAVIDSON. I thank the Chair and thank our witnesses and,
Ms. Malinowski, please accept my sincere apologies and deepest
sympathies.
This is something that was avoidable and I'm encouraged, frank-
ly, because I hear colleagues that were once highly concerned about
warrant practices and held hearings when they were in the major-
ity about criminal justice reform may actually be willing to do it
instead of politicizing it.
I felt as a guy who was not part of the Judiciary Committee-
I'm on Financial Services and Foreign Affairs-and only on this be-
cause we have seen abuses of the Fourth Amendment that creep
into your financial privacy.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 152 of 236

66
We have seen weaponized government go after every kind of
nook and cranny they can for what have historically been viewed
as law-abiding citizens. Restraints against general warrants-so
John Adams said, "general warrants swept up whoever might have
been present in the square on certain days."
These kinds of things that went on are part of what led to the
revolution. So, it was an abuse of privacy. If you look at it, part
of the concern for warrants is that they don't take the least risky
means possible, which does expose officers to risk.
It exposes not just people that maybe you do have probable cause
to suspect a crime, but it exposes their family members and others
to unnecessary risk, and maybe there is a way that we should look
at the intent of the Fourth Amendment, that it would minimize the
risk here.
It seems that there was a much less invasive way to solve the
crime that was alleged here, and you would think that because of
the Biden Administration's focus on this crime that this was the
big crime wave that's sweeping the country, that apparently the
only reason we have guns on the street are because people like Mr.
Malinowski that-but for Mr. Malinowski and people like that the
streets would be safe in Washington, DC.
People wouldn't be getting carjacked and robbed at gunpoint.
Chicago wouldn't see massive waves of murders. It's pistol braces.
It must be the pistol braces because they're going after the pistol
braces.
There is no basis in terms of the crime that the Biden Adminis-
tration is going after, and I think that's why the public is so con-
cerned. You're targeting people in part, because of political ide-
ology.
President Biden's recent Executive Order concerning firearms
dealers was described by the White House themselves as getting,
quote, "as close to universal background checks as possible without
additional legislation."
I do not recall Congress voting on universal background checks.
On the contrary, this is a bureaucrat at an agency passing pseudo
laws-fake laws-and they're using them to effectively force de-
fendants to spend their treasure defending against a crime that
hasn't even become crime in the normal way by law.
So, Mr. Cleckner, what steps can be taken to defund and defeat
these fake laws originating at the ATF in particular?
Mr. CLECKNER. I think Congress needs to hold them accountable.
Mr. DAVIDSON. To point that out one of the main ways we do
that is with appropriations. So, it's not just whether they're funded,
but what can they do with the funds and part of that is timely.
We're going back into appropriations. Having passed on holding
accountable the agency this time, hopefully, we'll find the resolve
to do that this time in the next path.
Mr. Cummins, I just wanted to close out with you because you're
highlighting an important case. You've had a background where
you are familiar with the warrant process and I think not just here
in this case you pointed out, look, it is a practice.
Is it good practice to knock at 6 a.m., and come in and-you
would think that-El Chapo maybe no-knock warrants. There's a
time and a place. How do they weigh the right time and place for
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 153 of 236

67
those kinds of tactics versus maybe less intrusive, less risky tac-
tics?
Mr. CUMMINS. Well, we have given great deference to law en-
forcement to choose their tactics and we are concerned about law
enforcement officers' safety and so that's a good reason to do that.
I do believe we have over militarized our law enforcement. I have
great concerns about that. I think we do that this way too often,
and we need to take a hard look at it.
In this particular case, I don't think they did it lawfully at all
and there's zero justification. Even that said, law enforcement does
this kind of thing quite a bit.
Mr. DAVIDSON. You point out that there's surveillance for a
while. It wasn't like an exigent circumstance-there wasn't evi-
dence that was going to be flushed down the toilet or disposed of.
There was evidence that would be physically present onsite and
there were lots of periods of time where Mr. Malinowski was in a
place where he could have been detained and questioned, could
have been brought to the residence or could have been caught as
he's walking into or about to walk out of a home.
So, there were lots of less invasive means and I just hope that
we can find a way in statute or in practice to be able to say let's
do it that way more often and let's not violate the civil liberties of
our citizens.
With that I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back.
The Ranking Member is recognized for closing comments or ques-
tions.
Ms. PLASKE'IT. I just want to thank the witnesses for being here.
Ms. Malinowski, I see the pain that you are still in, and I pray
that there's resolution for you and your family, and I thank you
that I see that you have a support system with you. Thank you to
those who are there with you providing that support to you in this
time.
I have nothing at this time further. I would, however, request
and introduce for the record the Demand of two letters sent to
Point Blank Firearms.
Being on the Demand two letter program for two years in a row
means that a business sold 25 or more firearms than a business
here that were connected to a crime.
Chair JORDAN. Without objection.
Ms. PLASKE'IT. Thank you.
Then, I would also remind my colleagues about that appropria-
tions process, that removing funding from ATF individuals on this
Committee who pass or want to have laws passed such as the
elimination of ATF, and the abolition of ATF is not the way to sup-
port regulating guns in this country-that we need to do this com-
prehensively. A step in the right direction was the bipartisan gun
legislation that was passed in 2022.
There's more work to be done, and with that, I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. Mr. Cummins, when government changes the
rules without a vote of Congress is that the weaponization of gov-
ernment?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 154 of 236

68
When you have these agencies unilaterally change the law with-
out a vote of the Legislative body, would you call that the
weaponization of government?
Mr. CUMMINS. It seems that way to me.
Chair JORDAN. Mr. Cleckner, would you agree?
Mr. CLECKNER. I do.
Chair JORDAN. Mr. Graham?
Mr. GRAHAM. Chair, that's a department doing what they're di-
rected to do, sir.
Chair JORDAN. OK. Let me say this. So, when the ATF unilater-
ally changed the definition of what a pistol brace and how that
worked, and overnight made law-abiding citizens then felons-you
either have to turn the gun in or you're a felon-is that the
weaponization of government, Mr. Cleckner?
Mr. CLECKNER. It sure is, especially when we don't know that
every American that had one of those got the message.
Chair JORDAN. Exactly. The same thing seems to be happening-
seems to have happened in the case of Mr. Malinowski.
The ATF decided to change the definition of what an FFL-what
a licensee was from principal livelihood to someone who's earning
a profit, but it's even worse because they didn't have the definition
changed and enacted when this terrible incident happened with
Mr. Malinowski.
That, to me, is the weaponization of government, unilaterally
making changes without it going through the Legislative Branch of
government the way our system is supposed to work-the checks
and balances how they're supposed to work-and in the case we're
talking about so much today they hadn't even fully made that
change.
They didn't even follow their own rule, for goodness sake, and we
have an American who's no longer with us because of that.
Mr. Cummins, a response?
Mr. CUMMINS. I agree with everything you said.
Chair JORDAN. Let me ask you one other question. Was the Little
Rock police involved in the raid on the Malinowski home?
Mr. CUMMINS. We know they were present. We don't know ex-
actly what their role was. There were 10 carloads of agents at the
house.
Chair JORDAN. We have seen the video of all the carloads coming
from the Wal-Mart parking lot to the Malinowski neighborhood. We
have seen that video.
Were the Little Rock police officers wearing body cams on the
morning of this raid on the Malinowski home?
Mr. CUMMINS. According to what we have been told nobody had
body cams on even though Little Rock police are equipped with
body cams.
Chair JORDAN. That was my next question. They're supposed to
wear them, the Little Rock-
Mr. CUMMINS. It's my understanding. I'm not 100 _percent sure
about that.
Chair JORDAN. Do you believe that the ATF told Little Rock po-
lice officers not to have their body cams on or not to have them en-
gaged?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 155 of 236

69
Mr. CUMMINS. When the local PD is supporting a Federal agency
typically they're taking orders from the Federal agency. So, I would
presume-I don't know-that ATF instructed them to not wear it.
Chair JORDAN. That would be a logical presumption. As a guy
who is a former U.S. Attorney the way it works Federal law en-
forcement-
Mr. CUMMINS. That's consistent with my understanding of how
those relationships work. •
Chair JORDAN. Again, we're back to the question you asked in
your opening statement a couple hours ago. Why?
Why would ATF tell Little Rock, don't follow your own rules?
We're not going to follow our rules. We don't want you following
your rules. We don't want any video footage of what we're about
to do at the Malinowski home, an upstanding citizen by all ac-
counts-your whole testimony-highest paid official in Little Rock
municipal government.
Why would they do that?
Mr. CUMMINS. We have no idea.
Chair JORDAN. Yes, but we got to find the answer to that because
this is the weaponization of government if I've ever seen it.
We thank you all for being here today, for your testimony, and
I got to say something official here before we close our hearing.
That concludes today's hearing. We thank our witnesses for ap-
pearing before the Subcommittee today. Without objection, all
Members will have five legislative days to submit additional writ-
ten questions for the witnesses or additional materials for the
record.
Without objection, the hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 12:20 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
All materials submitted for the record by Members of the Select
Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government
can be found at: https: I I docs.house.gov I Committee I Calendar I
ByEuent.aspx?EuentID=l 17338.

0
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 156 of 236

EXHIBITD
House Judiciary
Hearing (May 23, 2024)
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM
AUTHENTICATE~
Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 157 of 236
U.S. GOVERNMENT
INFORMATION
CPO

OVERSIGHT OF THE BUREAU OF ALCOHOL,

TOBACCO, FIREARMS, AND EXPLOSIVES

HEARING
BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTEENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION

THURSDAY, MAY 23, 2024

Serial No. 118-81

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

Available via: http:/ /judiciary.house.gou

U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

5&-811 WASHINGTON : 2024
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 158 of 236

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

JIM JORDAN, Ohio, Chair
DARRELLISSA,California JERROLD NADLER, New York, Ranking
MA'IT GAETZ, Florida Member
ANDY BIGGS, Arizona ZOE LOFGREN, California
TOM MCCLINTOCK, California SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas
TOM TIFFANY, Wisconsin STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky HENRY C. "HANK" JOHNSON, JR., Georgia
CHIP ROY, Texas ADAM SCHIFF, California
DAN BISHOP, North Carolina ERIC SWALWELL, California
VICTORIA SPARTZ, Indiana TED LIEU, California
SCO'IT FITZGERALD, Wisconsin PRAMILA JAYAPAL, Washington
CLIFF BENTZ, Oregon J. LUIS CORREA, California
BEN CLINE, Virginia MARY GAY SCANLON, Pennsylvania
KELLY ARMSTRONG, North Dakota JOE NEGUSE, Colorado
LANCE GOODEN, Texas LUCY McBATH, Georgia
JEFF VAN DREW, New Jersey MADELEINE DEAN, Pennsylvania
TROY NEHLS, Texas VERONICA ESCOBAR, Texas
BARRY MOORE, Alabama DEBORAH ROSS, North Carolina
KEVIN KILEY, California CORI BUSH, Missouri
HARRIET HAGEMAN, Wyoming GLENN IVEY, Maryland
NATHANIEL MORAN, Texas BECCA BALINT, Vermont
LAUREL LEE, Florida
WESLEY HUNT, Texas
RUSSELL FRY, South Carolina
Vacancy
CHRISTOPHER HIXON, Majority Staff Director
AARON HILLER, Minority Staff Director & Chief of Staff

(II)
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 159 of 236

CONTENTS
TmlRsOAY, MAY 23, 2024

OPENING STATEMENTS
Page
The Honorable Jim Jordan, Chair of the Committee on the Judiciary from
the State of Ohio ....... .... ... .. ...................... ... .... .......... ......... ....... ....... .... .. ..... ......... 1
The Honorable Jerrold Nadler, Ranking Member of the Committee on the
Judiciary from the State of New York ................................................................ 3
WITNESSES
The Hon. Steven Dettelbach, Director, The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Fire-
arms, and Explosives
Oral Testimony .............. .. ................... .. ....... ................ ...... ........ ........ ... .............. .. 6
Prepared Testimony ........... ..................... .................. ........ ........ .. ... ....... ............. .. 8
LETTERS, STATEMENTS, ETC. SUBMITTED FOR THE HEARING
All materials submitted for the record by the Committee on the Judiciary
are listed below .................................................................................................... 76
Materials submitted by the Honorable Jerrold Nadler, Ranking Member of
the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of New York, for the
record
A letter to the Honorable Jerrold Nadler, Ranking Member of the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary from the State of New York, May, 22, 2024,
from the Carlos Felipe Uriarte, Assistant Attorney General, U.S.
Department of Justice, Office of Legislative Affairs, for the record
An article entitled, "House Republicans want to defund the police," Mar.
7, 2024, The Washington Post
A letter to the Honorable Jim Jordan, Chair of the Select Subcommittee
on the Weaponization from the State of Ohio, and the Honorable
Stacey E. Plaskett, Ranking Member of the Select Subcommittee
on the Weaponization, May 23, 2024, from the National Fraternal
Order of Police
An article entitled, "Are Guns the Leading Cause of Death for Children
in the U.S.?" Apr. 3, 2023, Snopes, submitted by the Honorable Troy Nehls,
a Member of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Texas,
for the record
A letter regarding Bryan Malinowski, to the Honorable Jim Jordan, Chair
of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Ohio, May 21, 2024,
from the U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms
and Explosives, submitted by the Honorable Mary Gay Scanlon, a Member
of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Pennsylvania, for
the record
Materials submitted by the Honorable Becca Balint, a Member of the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary from the State of Vermont, for the record
An article entitled, "Milwaukee sees decline in homicides in 2023, but
numbers still not back to pre-pandemic levels," Jan. 3, 2024, WPR
Crime statistics from the Milwaukee Police Department, May 22, 2024
Materials submitted by the Honorable Madeleine Dean, a Member of the
Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Pennsylvania, for the record
A list of fallen ATF agents entitled, "Fallen Agents."

(III)
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 160 of 236

IV
Page
Materials submitted by the Honorable Madeleine Dean, a Member of the
Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Pennsylvania, for the
record-Continued
An article entitled, ''US stats show violent crime dramatically falling,
so why is there a rising clash with perception?" Mar. 22, 2024,
ABC News
An article entitled, "Germantown shooting: 3-year-old shoots herself in
the eye with father's gun in Philadelphia home, police say," Apr.
6, 2024, 6ABC
A copy of the search warrant for Bryan Malinowski, the United States Dis-
trict Court, Eastern District of Arkansas, submitted by the Honorable
Glenn Ivey, a Member of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State
of Maryland, for the record
Materials submitted by the Honorable Lucy McBath, a Member of the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary from the State of Georgia, for the record
An article entitled, "Firearms overtook auto accidents as the leading
cause of death in children," Apr. 22, 2022, NPR
An article entitled, "Firearms Now No. 1 Cause Of Death For U.S.
Children-While Drug Poisoning Enters Top 5," Oct. 5, 2023, Forbes
A letter in support of HR 3269, to the Honorable Scott Fitzgerald, a Member
of the Committee on the Judiciary from the State of Wisconsin, Apr. 17,
2024, from Earl Griffith, ELG Consultants, LLC, submitted by the Honor-
able Scott Fitzgerald, a Member of the Committee on the Judiciary from
the State of Wisconsin, for the record
QUESTIONS AND RESPONSES FOR THE RECORD
Questions to the Hon. Steven Dettelbach, Director, The Bureau of Alcohol,
Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, submitted the Honorable by Ben Cline
from the State of Virginia, the Honorable Lance Gooden from the State
of Texas, and the Honorable Troy Nehls from the State of Texas, Members
of the Committee on the Judiciary, for the record
No response at the time of publication
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 161 of 236

OVERSIGHT OF THE BUREAU OF ALCOHOL,

TOBACCO, FIREARMS, AND EXPLOSIVES

Thursday, May 23, 2024

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY
Washington, DC
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:09 a.m., in Room
2141, Rayburn House Office Building, the Hon. Jim Jordan [Chair
of the Committee] presiding.
Members present: Representatives Jordan, Issa, Gaetz, Biggs,
McClintock, Tiffany, Massie, Roy, Bishop, Spartz, Fitzgerald,
Bentz, Cline, Armstrong, Van Drew, Nehls, Moore, Hageman, Lee,
Hunt, Fry, Nadler, Johnson, Swalwell, Jayapal, Correa, Scanlon,
Neguse, McBath, Dean, Ross, Bush, Ivey, and Balint.
Chair JORDAN. The Committee will come to order. Without objec-
tion, the Chair is authorized to declare a recess at any time.
We welcome everyone to today's hearing on Oversight of the Bu-
reau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Arizona to lead us
in the Pledge of Allegiance.
ALL. I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United Stat~s of Amer-
ica, and to the Republic for which it stands, one Nation, under God,
indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Chair JORDAN. We will begin the hearing with opening state-
ments. The Chair recognizes himself.
The government is not supposed to change the rules without a
vote of Congress. The Executive Branch executes the laws; the Leg-
islative Branch passes the laws, but when you bypass that format,
which is exactly what the ATF has done, you get all kinds of bad
things.
First, it was the pistol brace rule. November 26, 2012, the ATF
told the inventor of the pistol brace, quote, "he would not be subject
to the National Firearms Act," but last year they changed the rule.
After 12 years changed the rule. By the way, the pistol brace was
put together to help disabled veterans be able to shoot, be able to
practice and shoot at the range. Now, with the rule change if you
don't turn it in, get rid of it, you become a felon.
Then, there was a policy change that the ATF enacted. The ATF
now says if a Federal firearms licensee makes a mistake on the
form, even if it is a clerical mistake, well, that now equals a, quote,
"willful falsifying of records" and they could lose their license. In
fact, 157 FFLs lost their license last year in this gotcha game that
(1)
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 162 of 236

2
the ATF is playing with people who are in the business of selling
firearms.
The pressure to deal with what-the ATF comes out and finds
you made some mistake on a form, many people just voluntarily
giving up their FFL: 24 in 2021, 69 in 2022. Eighty people last year
gave up their license versus dealing with the hassle from the agen-
cy that is supposed to help them comply, not put them out of busi-
ness.
Finally, there is the new definition of who actually needs a Fed-
eral firearms license. Since 1968, the definition said it had to be
your principal livelihood, your principal livelihood in the business
of selling firearms. You needed that. If you were doing that, you
needed an FFL. This past Monday a new definition was put in
place. It said, "if you are earning a profit." The ATF can't really
define what that means. You sell one gun to your cousin, made
$10, made $50 on the sale of a gun, two guns to someone, or 10
guns. In fact, they couldn't even tell the court how it works, this
new definition.
When you make up the rules as you go, bad things happen. You
lose your livelihood for a clerical error, you become a felon for a pis-
tol brace they told you was legal for 12 years, and you might even
get shot. That is what happened to Bryan Malinowski just two
months ago. We have Bryan's widow with us today. She was here
with us yesterday. Heard some powerful testimony from U.S. Attor-
ney Bud Cummins who represents the Malinowski family. In fact,
I am going to read from Mr. Cummins' testimony that he gave in
this room yesterday.
It is legal to buy, trade, and sell guns without a Federal firearms license
if you are a collector or hobbyist, but at some point the ATF decicf'ed that
Bryan Malinowski had crossed a murky line and he was no longer a
hobbyist. Because of that, the ATF concluded he was required to purchase
a $200 Federal firearms license before he sold anymore guns.
I call it murky because there is no bright line test. It is truly subjective.
One thing seems certain: Bryan Malinowski received no warning. His fam-
ily, his friends, and his work colleagues would all guarantee you he loved
his career and he would have never knowingly jeopardized it over a week-
end hobby.
~~~~~~~~~~~~=b~~~
lary Clinton Airport in Little Rock, Arkansas, highest paid official in the
municipal government, made $260,000 a year. On March 19th at 6:01 a.m.,
over one hour before sunup 10 carloads of the ATF agents and Little Rock
Police Department officers came to the Malinowski home to execute their
search warrant. Not an arrest warrant. Search warrant.
At 6:02:46 a.m., the ATF agents in full SWAT gear approached the front
door. They had a piece of tape ready to cover the camera lens of the door-
bell camera, which they did. Next, Ms. Malinowski heard only a loud crash
as her front door caved in. Her husband Bryan woke up to the sound of
the crush, found a pistol, loaded a magazine, and left the bedroom to inves-
tigate.
Bryan warned his wife to stay behind in the bedroom, but Maer stub-
bornly followed him down the hallway. The ATF apparently killed elec-
tricity to the home. The front room was usually well lit at night, but Ms.
Malinowski saw only darkness as she peered down toward the front
entryway. She could only see shadowy outlines of presumed home invaders
standing in her front hallway. That is what Bryan saw too.
Bryan fired a few shots at the intruders' feet to drive them back out of
the front door. The ATF shot Bryan in the head. His wife was standing
inches away from him. A mere 57 seconds. Fifty-seven seconds elapsed from
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 163 of 236

3
the time agents covered the doorbell camera until gunshots erupted and
Bryan was fatally wounded. 6:02:46 to 6:03:43 a.m.
Agents immediately dragged Ms. Malinowski into the front yard. She was
barefoot wearing minimal night clothing and the temperature was 34 de-
grees. They locked her in the back seat of a car and detained her there for
four hours, refusing her many requests to check on her husband, her hus-
band she had just seen shot, wouldn't allow her to get clothes, or even use
the neighbor's bathroom.
Even though policies have been in place at both the ATF and the Little Rock
Police Department for the past three years requiring the use of body-worn cam-
eras when executing any search warrant, the Department of Justice tells us
that no body cameras were used.
If this isn't the weaponization of government, I don't know what
is. I don't know what is.
Mr. Dettelbach, we are going to have questions about this and
a host of other things the ATF has done under your watch. A host
of other things. We appreciate you being here today. We appreciate
you taking our questions, but there are going to be tough questions
from folks on our side. We have a video I would like to show
which-just so-it is a minute-and-a-half, but it first shows the
ATF agents assembling in the Walmart parking lot a week before
March 19th when they were going to execute this search warrant,
again pre-dawn hours a week before, but decided not to because
they realized Mr. Malinowski wasn't home. Then, it shows what
happened a week later as they approached the Malinowski home.
So, let's run the video.
[Video played.]
Chair JORDAN. The Chair now recognizes the Ranking Member
for an opening statement.
Mr. NADLER. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Mr. Chair, we last conducted
an oversight hearing of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms,
and Explosives, or the ATF, just over one year ago. Since that time
a few things have changed, and a great many things have stayed
the same. Let's begin with what has changed.
Last month the Attorney General signed an ATF final rule clari-
fying who was, quote, "engaged in the business," of selling firearms
and who must therefore obtain a license to sell firearms and con-
duct the necessary background checks. This rule implements a
change in this definition made by Congress when we passed the Bi-
partisan Safer Communities Act, the first significant piece of gun
violence prevention legislation in nearly 30 years.
Prior to the passage of the BSCA a person was, quote, "engaged
in the business," of selling firearms if they did so, quote, "with the
principal objective of livelihood and profit." Under the new law a
person is engaged in the business of selling firearms if they do so,
quote, "to predominantly earn a profit."
In finalizing this new rule ATF has adhered to its directive from
Congress and has ensured that the ATF regulations are consistent
with the definitions we updated through this historic legislation
that makes Americans safer.
Importantly, the new definition and the new rule ensure that
more gun sales, including those at gun shows or through the inter-
net, include a background check, a life-saving tool that keeps guns
out of dangerous hands. These changes are the only significant ex-
pansion of the Federal background check system since it was estab-
lished in the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act in 1993.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 164 of 236

4
The Department of Justice estimates that there are over 20,000
unlicensed sellers who were taking advantage of ambiguity in the
law and who will now have to obtain a license and conduct back-
ground checks.
Yesterday, in a related hearing Republicans argued that this new
rule is being used to target individuals who are merely selling a
gun from their personal collection or who occasionally buy and sell
guns as part of a hobby. This is false. The rule, quote,
Expressly recognizes that individuals who purchase firearms for the en-
hancement of a personal collection or a legitimate lobby are permitted by
the Gun Control Act to occasionally buy and sell firearms for those pur-
poses or occasionally resell to a licensee or to a family member for lawful
purposes without the need to obtain a license.
The final rule also states that, quote,
Nothing in this rule shall be construed as precluding a person from lawfully
acquiring a firearm for self-protection or other lawful personal use.
The law and the rule do not impose any new requirements on those
who are merely selling a firearm to a neighbor, a friend, or a fam-
ily member, or those who collect and occasionally sell firearms as
part of their hobby.
Rather than targeting innocent lobbyist sellers this rule will per-
mit-I am sorry, will prevent illegal gun sellers from profiting off
gun trafficking. This comes at a critical time given that the ATF's
National Firearms Commerce and Trafficking Assessment revealed
that unlicensed gun sales were contributing more and more to the
flow of firearms into the black market and unsurprisingly becoming
a leading source of crime guns.
The second new development since we last heard from the ATF
Director Dettelbach is that Republicans used their control of the
House to enact significant cuts to several critical law enforcement
agencies including the Department of Justice, the FBI, and the
ATF. We knew this was coming because Republicans have been
forthright in their determination to defund, intimidate, and ham-
string the agency so that it can no longer effectively do its job and
protect Americans from violent crime.
Republicans' own messaging documents actually celebrate the
seven-percent cut to the ATF, the law enforcement agency respon-
sible for protecting communities from gun violence, stopping gun
trafficking, and ensuring lawful and responsible gun ownership.
This brings me to what is still as true today as it was over a year
ago when we last conducted an oversight hearing of the ATF. The
ATF is still the primary Federal agency tasked with keeping guns
out of the wrong hands and it is still doing that important work
even with the budget cuts forced through by House Republicans.
The ATF is still providing vital resources that help State and local
law enforcements solve crimes and prevent gun violence.
The ATF is still the only agency in the country that is able to
trace crime guns helping law enforcement determine how a gun
came to be owned and used in a violent crime.
The ATF is also still the only agency that provides local, State,
Tribal, and Federal law enforcement with ballistic imaging anal-
ysis, a critical tool that could help solve crime and prevent further
gun violence. It provides this assistance at no cost to its law en-
forcement partners.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 165 of 236

5
Despite the significant value that the ATF provides to State and
local law enforcement, Republicans have defunded the agency and
they repeatedly seek to unravel its regulations through litigation,
Congressional Review Act resolutions, and frivolous investigations,
even when the ATF is merely following the law as directed by Con-
gress. Some Republicans have even introduced a bill to abolish the
ATF altogether.
The majority says that it stands with law enforcement, so why
does it seek to abolish the only law enforcement agency with the
capability of tracing crime guns? The majority says that they sup-
port State and local police, so why do they attempt to starve the
agency that provides State and local police officers with so many
critical resources to solving crime including homicides, gun traf-
ficking, and organized crime? Why do they oppose commonsense
protections like background checks and red flag laws favored by
State and local police agencies nationwide?
The answer lies in another part of the ATF's responsibilities:
Making sure that gun dealers follow the law by conducting back-
ground checks, refusing to sell to those who are not allowed to have
firearms, and keeping records so that crime guns can be traced.
The overwhelming majority of gun sellers have no problem fol-
lowing these laws, but when gun dealers willfully refuse to follow
them, it is the ATF's responsibility to revoke their license to sell.
Republicans' priorities are clear: They would prefer to keep every
gun store in the country open, even those that willfully violate the
law, rather than to let the ATF save lives simply by enforcing the
law.
This brings me to the final thing that is still the same since our
last oversight hearing. It is still the case that we are losing more
than 100 Americans to gun violence every single day. Even without
counting suicides we have already lost more 6,000 Americans to
shooting so far this year. That includes 88 young children, 454
teens, and 30 law enforcement officers who w,ere killed by gunfire
just this year.
Democrats have put forth a range of solutions to prevent gun vio-
lence, to support law enforcement, and to solve crimes, but since
they took control of the House our Republican colleagues have not
advanced a single bill that would make Americans safer from gun
violence. Instead, they have continued to push for unfettered access
to assault weapons, concealable rifles, and ghost guns, and to abol-
ish the very agency tasked with preventing gun crimes.
As Republicans continue to seek freedom from gun regulations,
we will continue to seek communities free from gun violence.
Director Dettelbach, thank you for appearing here today to talk
about the important work that the ATF does to keep Americans
safe. I look forward to your testimony and I yield back the balance
ofmy time.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back.
The 1.4 billion in 2022, 1.6 billion in 2023, and 1.75 billion 2024.
Hardly a cut to their budget.
Without objections, all other opening statements will be included
in the record.
We will now introduce today's witness. Mr. Dettelbach is the Di-
rector of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 166 of 236

He was sworn in on July 13, 2022. We welcome our witness and

thank him for appearing today.
We will begin by swearing you in. Would you please rise and
raise your right hand?
Do you swear or affirm under penalty of perjury that the testi-
mony you are about to give is true, correct to the best of your
knowledge, information, and belief, so help you God?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I do.
Chair JORDAN. Let the record reflect that the witness has an-
swered in the affirmative.
Thank you. You can be seated.
Please know your written testimony will be entered into the
record in its entirety. Accordingly, we ask that you summarize your
testimony. Director Dettelbach, you may begin.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. STEVEN DETTELBACH
Mr. DETTELBACH. Chair Jordan, Ranking Member Nadler, the
Members of the Committee, when I testified last year I said it was
my great honor to lead the dedicated employees of the ATF. This
year I'll repeat that statement and add that agents run toward
gunfire to protect strangers, and our staff works day and night to
support our mission. Their work in the last year has been nothing
short of spectacular.
As I stated last year, the level of violent crime in America is un-
acceptable, however due to the hard work of these heroes and our
partners we have made significant progress in making communities
safer. Last year our Nation had one of the steepest single year de-
clines in violent crime in its history. Murders down nearly 13 per-
cent across 175 cities. This doesn't happen by accident. It is the re-
sult of hard and very dangerous work.
In 2022, Federal weapons convictions hit a record high according
to recent reporting. In 2023, the ATF's criminal enforcement efforts
were up again. We indicted even more cases and increased convic-
tions by 8.5 percent and the cases that we do make an impact be-
cause we focus on removing the most violent offenders from our
streets. This progress tells us the strategies are working. It is not
the time to let up now.
The ATF's data-driven support helps law enforcement lock up the
trigger pullers and stop the flow of illegal guns to them from traf-
ficking. We must go after both the shooters and the criminals.
Both. That is the only way we will continue to drive down firearms
crime.
Firearms trafficking is not a victimless crime. Those who illegally
arm violent people: Gang members and drug dealers, they are re-
sponsible for the violence that follows. A recent ATF report shows
that 60 percent of trafficked firearms go to convicted felons, prohib-
ited people, and thousands of these trafficked guns are used in
murders and shootings. Further, the most common type of firearms
trafficking now is dealing firearms for profit without a license.
In Midland-Odessa, Texas, for example, in 2019 a man who
couldn't pass a background check from a licensed dealer instead
went and got a gun from an illegally unlicensed firearm dealer. The
result, a deal in a parking lot, a mass shooting. Seven dead, twen-
ty-five shot, three police officers, and a seventeen-month-old child.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 167 of 236

7
These types of crimes prompted Congress to pass the Bipartisan
Safer Communities Act two years ago. The law provided new tools
to hold firearms traffickers accountable. Since then, the Depart-
ment of Justice led by the ATF and prosecutors has charged nearly
500 defendants under those new provisions.
Motivated by cases like the murders in Midland-Odessa Congress
also included a specific provision expanding who must obtain a
Federal license to deal firearms and therefore crucially who must
conduct background checks before selling those guns.
Last month, the ATF used the authority Congress delegated to
it to issue a final rule on being, quote, "engaged in the business of
firearms dealing." This rule helps to identify those who must be li-
censed under Congress' law and is designed to raise compliance
with the statute Congress wrote.
Even with our progress the toll of gun violence remains crushing.
More than 40,000 people died from gun violence last year. Another
36,000 suffered grievous wounds or wounds from gun violence.
Those are not just numbers. We all know-we agree those are real-
ly people. They're parents, they're brothers, they're sisters, and
they're children. In fact, the leading cause of death for American
children is gun violence. Not cars, not cancer, and Guns. That is
unacceptable.
We're reminded too often. It was two years ago tomorrow, in fact,
that a shooter opened fire at Robb Elementary School in Uvalde,
Texas murdering 19 kids, two teachers, and shooting 17 others. We
know there's been so many other tragedies like this.
Last, but not certainly least, as we commemorated Police Week
last week, we're reminded that all too often victims of firearms vio-
lence carry the badge. Last year, 49 brave officers were killed in
the line of duty by gunfire. This year, that number is already at
22 including four officers in North Carolina-went to the funeral-
gunned down while executing a warrant at the home of a firearms
violator.
We have to support law enforcement together including giving
law enforcement the resources we need to protect Americans.
Again, now is not the time to let up. We know what works. The
data are supporting it. It's time to double and triple down together
on our efforts to save more lives.
Mr. Chair, Mr. Ranking Member, and the Members of the Com-
mittee, I look forward to your questions.
[The prepared statement of the Hon. Dettelbach follows:]
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 168 of 236

S'f'.AT.EM~NT OF

STEVENDETTELBACH
l>lR'tCTOR.
BUREAU OF. ALCOHOL, TOBACCO;FiREARi'\1$ AND..EXPLOSIVES

BEFORE THE
COMMITI~E ON THE JlIQlCIUY
U,S'. HOUSE-OF REPRESENTATIVES

FOR A REARING .ENtil'LEi>

OVERSiG~T OF~E B~EAU OF'A~COiiQLt TqB~<;Cp, fiRE~RMS

.;,\ND EK.PLOSlVE.S

.PRESENl'.W

~\'23,i{)l4
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 169 of 236

S1ntement for the Rerord of Steven Ddtelbacli

Director
Bureau of.Alcoh_ol, Tobacco_, Firearms and Explosives
u;s. Department ot Justic~
Before the Committee on tl!e Judicinry
u;s. House ot .Representatives
At a lfear111g Entitied
Oversight or the Bureau of.Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

Presented
May,23,~ou

Good morning, Cli!linnan Jord11n, Ranking Member Nadler, !llld mcnibers Qf .thfs
Committee. Thank you for inviting rn~ to testify before you today:When T testified before you~
year ago, I" said that it is.my great honor to represent_ the dedicated- employees of the Bureau of
Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and £,q>losives (ATF) who work tirelessly _to·protect the i'merican
people ti-om viol!!n"l crime. That is truer today than ever. Each day, acro_ss the co~ntry, ATF·
eniplqyees are rilakiilg a real iinpiicfi!l the tight against.violent crim~ They'act \VJth great courage,
perseverance, professionalism, and tnlegilty. an·d i ain extremely proud of, and humbled by, tlieir
service and comniiµneht, • • • • ' •

Last year; the United States saw one of the steepest declines in violent crime in our history.
The extraordinary -efforts rnade by ATF, our law enfo~cement partners, and tiiis Adminiscration's
comprehensive violent crime reduction policies resulted in double digit drops in violent crime rates
-inclildina guri violence rates "in many cities in 2023. Murders. were· down nearly' iJ% aniong 1}5'
cities, do~; for.i~stance, I i:5% 11J. New Yor!t, 15;5% i~ Los Angeles, 12:7%10:Chicago, and, iO%
in Baltimore. I have'visltl;(l these places and worked with (?Ur law enforcement pa[\l\ersthere,-They
believe, and I agree, that this;prQgress tells us that our strategies are worl(iilg, and that it is nQt time
to let up; it is time to double and triple down on these efforts so that this decline continues. ,\t ATF.
that means ramping up our efforts using evidence-based. data-dri>Jeii violent ·crime strategies to,
(1) identify and disrupttlietrigger puiicrswho·!lcive violence withfo·our communities, and (2) stop
the tlow oftirearms tq the illicit market, where they far too often·end up"in the hands of those.same
trigg~ pullers or·otherindividuals the law says cannot have theni,

This is an especially important pointto maketoday,'the day before tlie two-year annivers.uy•
of the Rcibb Elementary School mass shooting in Uvalde, Texas, which claimed the"ii'ves of 19'
children and two teachers and .injured 17 others. In the.wake <if that tragedy, Congicss passed the
Bipartisan Safer -Gomm unities Act. (BSCA), Among other goals, that law contained specific
provisions aimed at "helping law enforcement,. including ATF, prevent 1he illegal movement of
firearms into the-hand~ ofpr<ihibited individuals. These bipartisan. cornmo11-sense efforts make a.
real difference, as they provide tlie invaluable law enforcement fools nec~sary to heip identify,
d"isrupt, and dismantle the root causes;of gun.crime:

2
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 170 of 236

10

Every day, together with our federaf. state, local, Tribal, and territorial law enforcement
partners, .ATF seeks to use these legal tools supplied· by ·Congress to k~ our C()mmuhities safe
from gun criine. Together with our law enforcement panners, ATF does this, including by:

Enforcing.the New Crimin_nl Pro1•i.~inn.f in t/rccBiP.artisnn Sn/er Co11111111nities Act. In.

Ju~e of 2022, Congress passed tlie BSCJ\, which _gave ATF riew criminal statutes-stra~
purchasing, 18 u.s,c. § 932, and firearms trafficldng, 18 U.S.C. § 933-to protect the public from
gun crime by Holding tliose accused of supplying illicit weapons accountable. Since the BSCA's.
enactment. th~ Department of JUstic~ has. charged over 480 defendants under BSCA's new straw
purchasing and fireanns trafficking provisions. At ATF, these new fools are allowing our special
agents to go ailc:t the criminals whO'flood our streets 1\>ith weapons and put guns in tlie hands of
indivi~uals ~ho are prohibilf!!I by law from having them, Jl!st last month, for example, ATF used
the BSCA to help.:

• Biirig straw' purchasing charges against three Texas men for their alleged
role'in purchasing firearms and transpOrting them to a M~xican drug qirtei. 1

• Secure an 84-month prison sentence for an Ohio rna·n who pieaded guilty to
being engag~ in .the business of dealing in firearms without a liceilse and
firearms trafficking after selling over 35 firearms. 2

• Obtain· ·a 23'...year piison senten~e for -an Iowa man, Who was charged,
together with ten other m~rrlbcrs of a crimin.al street gang irwolved in the
distribution of fentanyl, straw purchasing. firearms· trafficking. and'
possession ofmacliincguns, for his role in an investigation that involved 92
firearms. 3

'!Engngetl in tlz'e B11siness" R11/em(1k~ng, In en~tting the BSCI\, Congrqs also chose to,
C.'<pand the category 9f people who must obtain a license and, therefore, conduct ~ackground,
ch~ks before selling firearms. Decades ago, in the 1960s, C<,ingress decided that anyone engaged:
in the business <ifdealing fircanns for profit wa_s required to get a federal license. In the 1990s,

I Sce·USAO s.6. Tex. Press Rei case, 771/'i!i!. i11di<;fcd/or l'ro11idi;,g Firr!C1rms /(J Cariei di;i No~I'!,
(April 30, :2024) availahle at ,vww.justice.gov/usao-sdtx/pr/three-indictcd•providinp.-firearms-
cartel-del•nOreste.
2 See_ USAO N.D. Ohio Press Release, "local Men .!l'enrenced lo 1mpris611meri1 for Illegal
t;afj/clr:ing hi Pirea'fm.~ (April 19,.2024) 01,ailablc ai www.justice,gov/usao-ndoh/pr/local-men-
sentenced-imprisonment-illegnl~tmfficking-tirearms.
3 Sl!e :uSA0 S.O. Iowa Pres:. Relea:.e, Def1mdi1111s Charged i11 Joi/II Fedl!ral, Stall!, and /.umf
Jm;es1igatio11 of Pirearm.v 'lrajficki11g and .Drug Dis1fib111io11; {July 21, 2023.) aw1ilat,le ttf
www justice.gov/tlsa1>:sdia/pr/defendants-chacged•joint-federal-state-and-locnl•invcstjgatjon-
firearms-trafficking. ~'ee a/.w.USAO S.D, Iowa Press Release, OMIJGa11gMemher Sen/c11cl!d 011
Firearms Traffieki11g m,d Fe111d11yl Dist'rib111io11Charges 10176 Molllhs in Fedei'a/Prisor, (April
ii, 2024) a\'ailahle at www.justii:e gov/usa1rsdia/pr/omb-gang-mcmber-sentenced-fircrums-
trafficking-and-fcntanyl-<listribution-chargcs-276
3
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 171 of 236

11

Congress added n Cl'\lcial requirement that those reder$1 licensees run backgrou11d checks whei1
they Seit guns, a system that IHL\ since prevented millions of felons 1ilid otli~r prohibited people
from buying a gun. In the BSC>\ Congre.ss e1cpanded the category of people who mu~l obiain a.
license and conduct hac:kground check:s before selling firearms by making change.~ to the definition
of"cngnged in the business'' as a dealer in fiream1s.

'Illicit unlicensed dealii1$, firctums trafficking. and straw purchas111~ are not victimless
crimes If you illegally help arm v,olcnt people, then you too ate r~por,sibie for.the violc,1ce that
fartoo often f9llows. Unfortunately: the.data, and our common sense, tell us that there is a hu-gc
and growing illicit market in firearms that nre being sold by people who are in foct engaged in thc-
bi1siness of dealing fireanns. htlt doing so without a license. Frorn 202.1 to 2023, federal
prosecutions.- for unlicensed firearms dealing increased l>y 52.%. A retent ATF study. in fact,
confinned that. even before {he 13SCA expanded the definition of Hrngaged in fhe busincss,~-
un!icensed dealing was skyrocketing as· a factor co11trtl,ufin9 to the Hllcit fl()W of Ii rearms. This
public safety issue, rcsulti!1g in coses like the 2019 m:iss stiootlng tn_ Midlruid-Odessn lhat !-illcd
seven and' injured 17 m9rc; 1n·c111ding three police officers, wns one-of the reasons C9nsress pa~scd
theBSCA.

Just last monih. ATF used the authority delegalcd unacr the Gun Control Act (QCA), as
amended by the BSCA. to issue a Final Rule with a regulatory "Definition of 'Engaged in the
Business. ,, •• This Final Rule was proniulgatcd pursuant to the full noticc-imd-commcnf 1>rov1slons
of rile Administrative Procedure Act. The Dep~ttmen\ of )Ustlce issUecf the Fhlai Rule afler
carefully considering and addressing nlmost388,000publiccomments. J;yen heforethis.Final Ruic-
went into effect, the Department of Justice and ATF were rued to block the enforcement of this
critical·regulation. Therefor~ while tarn limited in wha1 I can say regarding the F111al Rule during
the pcndency of U1ose lawstiitq. l encourage you to read the Final Rule for a fufl understanding of
i.t~ contcnt5:• To be clear. as f,said ,_,hen it was announced, the final Rule does not:

• Infringe on lhe Second Amendment rights of the many·law-abidinglicen;;cd

firearms_ dcalc:rs -arid lndixiiduals who alread~ play- by the mies. -These
dealers already n111 legally required backgrnund,checks: They nlready ke.cp
transacti~n record$. ihey already sen lirealms "~iii serial numbers 19 help
police in your ~istricrs trace crime guns ruid catch criminals. And they
already work ivith the ATF to jdentify and report suspicious activity.

• Requireuniversai back"ground checks. Only Congress can,requirc that c.yery

person who transfers or sells a gun needs a license. Rather. the Final Ruic-
explains that the lr.w does nor !'a)' - anil it hn.~ never .said - that ~ou are
afl0\9ed to engage in the business of dealing firearms without a license so
long.113 you do it at 11 gun show, on the intemct, or through ~omc other nc;\,c
c,r non-tmditionnl media.

Rather, this Fiiial Rule:

~ Defi11itioi1 oj''F:ngnged i11 lhc Husine.~s" as a Dealer hi Firtan11s. S9'FR 28968 (Apr. 19,
2024)
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 172 of 236

12

• Takes a.practical approach.aimed at identifying under current law, specific,

iden~fiablc actions, li1'e purchasing c?reclit• card _processing sciVices .to
repetitively accept :payment for firearms, lhat are· likely fo in~icate .that
someone it in the business of selling guns with the intenno profit.

• Plainly identifies other circumstances, like occasional transfers to family·

memb.ets, that ~o not-59 indicate,

• Provides ~mmon. sense clarity to ma~ sure that true hobbyists and.
colleclors·can enhance or liquidate their personal collections without.fear.of
violating the law.

Do111estii! ,ind /11tern11tiom1l Firearms .Trafficking. '.Firearms violence is far too often.
'Cacilrtaied by the ease with 'which crimjnais can obti!ln .wei\j)ons from u~la~r cori}~er~
including those engaged in .illicit dealing without a license, fircanns trafficking, and ~w
p1,1n:h~ing. In fact; between 20i7 an~ 2021; oO"/o of traffickl!d fir~aims went into ·1h~ hands of
previously cohvictedfeions or other prohibited people-. And thousands of those.illicit firearms were
usi?d to commit crimes, such as murd~r, drug u-afficking, a~vated assault,. and honie invasions. 5

That is why ATF is focused on identifyirrg, .disrupting; and dismantling domestic and.
interna!ion_al. firearms traflic1ting ~eti.liorks. Tiiose inciuiie not ~hly domestic n~gi'ks; but alSO'
networks tliat transport.firearms illegally from the.United. States toMexi~.-Cross-bord'!f fiteal!hs
traff!cking dQCS .not occur only at the border ~Y longer. N9r is it :limi~ fo cases witli scores of
firearms being illegally transported at onee: Rather, the pi'oblerri• is often. diffuse,. with firearms
traffil:king many tiines involving Ote smuggling ofoniy a few w~poni·at a time, f~m sources tha~
penetrate· fa~ away from the border, Tiitp the interior of the Unite<\ Sratcs. Accprdfhgly, ATF uses
every toofavailalSle to·adilressintemational imil domestic"ftrearins h'a'fficlai\g, including Operati'on
Southbound; • • ••

Operation Sotitli~outid, CS!li~lished i~ 2020, is ATF's signature initiative fociiscid on

degrading transnational crime organizations (fCOs) and tlie Mexican cartels' weapons trafficking
capabilities. This operational initiative employs a whole:.0f-govediment.effort .that consists of nine,
interagerrcy Fireartns Ttafficking Task Forces (FITTs) lleploS,ed ·i11 ~ight citi~ iiloni th~
0

South~est Border. with the sol~focus on interdictjng_illegal'fircanns tra~cking and th~n making
cases. It aims fo use these operations to.stem the t!'llffic!<lng offireafms fr!>!ll th~ United Sta(es to-
Mexico. In addition to ATF, these. task forces include parricipariis froni lnlinigration and ·Customs
l;n[orccmeilt (ICE), Homeland $~ty invesriSlltioris (Jf $1), CustOll!S and ·eoider :P~ecti.on
(CBP). and state and' l.ocalJaw enforcement. as well as prosecutors in. ihe pertinent United States'.
Attorney's Offices and the Department ofMtice1s Crirttinai Division.. •

5 See Narionaf Firearms Commerce and Traffic:kiilg .AsSj!ssmeni (NFCl'A),. aw1ilable ttf
https://www.atf.gov/fiream1s/docs/report/national-firenrtns-aimmerce-and-irafficking-
assessment-lirearms-commerce-volume.
5
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 173 of 236

13

This whole:-0f0govemment approach has proven effective, the. ~ata ~hoWs. Since 2020,
<>P._cratfon Souihbound has tesultccl'in a 400/4 inc~in inv~igations oflirearms traffickif!g•into
Mexico and a related 11% increase;in tireann seizures. 6 In 2023 alone, ,over 2,600 .firearms
d~tinM for Mccico were seized-representing a 65.8% increase over 2022-while over l 15;0'00
ro11nds of ammunition were also s~icd in 2023-n:prcsenting a 19"/4 increasef~m. 2022. 7

As these numbers indicate, in the last few months Operation. Southbound has seen many
successes. tn March 2024; in Texas, five indiviC,uals Were chaiged for aite!llpting to traffic inore'
than 100 military-grade tireanns to a drug cartel in Mexico. 8,Als'o, in Mareh.2024, in Califo:rnia.
28 d_c,:fendants associated with a criminal. organization with ties to Mexico were charged fo~ their.
involvement.in drug and fireanns traffickfog that included over 936 pounds.ofmeth; 5 pounds of
fenianyl, and SO firearms. 9 Thcscarejust examples ofthe.incr¢ible and dangerous-work ATF and·
our'laiv enforcement partners.are doing.to stop southbound Ii rearm trafficking.

Enlu,ncl!il Reg11l11tory.Enforcement. lnitiath'e (E!l£1). ATF's core ttiissi911 is to protect

the public! from violent crime, including cfiines involving the use of firearms, Part of that mission
inch:ides et1$uring that the provisions.of the GCA are followed, fo help' stem tile flow of fireamis
into the black market and io prohibited pe~ns. There i's an important regulatory aspect to thtit,
effort.. FFL~ are often ATF>"s first ·tine of defense against illegal gun traffitking and R!'C often. :a
source of critical infonniltion that. helps· law enforcement across the country identify straw
purchases and disttlpt illegai trafficking schemes. However, a smali number of FFi.s that-Willfully
vioh1te the law n-i"ust be held accounta!,l~ because tney.increase the risk tha(gunnv!II (all into ~e
hands of violent criminals. 19 This sadly ~ecame evident, for example, in August 2023, wh~ the

6 See Dept of State Fact Sheet, Th;rd.Meeri11g of1/ie u.s:-Mexico-Jligh-Leve/ See1iri1y Dialog,ie
(Oct. 13, 2023) available at https:llwww.s1111e.ggy/lhjrd-meetin11-of-the-u-~-mexico-hi•gh-lC)1c{-
security-
dialogue/#:-:text=DO1%27s%20Operation%20Southbound%2C%20led%20by the"/420number',1,·
20of"/o20fircat'!n$"/420~7.ed.
7 S(!e VS. Embassy Mexico, Fact S,,eet;•Riden-lfarris Adini11Fslrq1io11's 011J:i!i11g-~ffort$ to Stem
Firearms Traificki11g toMexico (J1,m~ I4, 2023), m'flilable-at https:f/mx.usembassy.gov/fact•sheet-
biden-harris-administrations-ongoing-effort.o;.t<>-stem-firearms-trafficking-to-mex:ico/.
8 USAO W.D; Tex. Press Release, PfreArresled iii Sqi,th Texas.for Allegedly '/rajjickl11g Military

Gr(Zde Fireprms to Mexi{:011 Drug Cartel, (March 2S; ~024) tn•ai/able at

https://www.j'ustice.gov/usao-wdtx/pr/fi11tl'arrested-south-texas-allegedly-trafficking•military•
grade-fireanns-mexican-drug.
9 USAO E:D. C~l.. Press.R,elease, '!Operation SLQ Ride'' ~i.ffl1t111tle~ !,t{ajor Dn,g Trafficking
<Jrg1111iza1io11 /11 7i,lare Cm11iti,, ,(March 14; 2024) ai-ailable at https://www.justice:gov/tlsa<>-
edca/pr/operation-slo-ridl.Mlismantles-major-drug-traffickins-orgaiiization-tulilrc-county;
••OSAO _D. Ariz, P.·ress Release, FFl Owner Semenced 10Pti$011/oi' llie_gally Pto9idi11ga Firearm
lo-~ Wi!lia/11S. Alleged Shooter of Phoenix Police Deparlme11/ Officer :!'yler Mo(dm_v111, (Aug.
10. 20~3) m'flilable al https://www.justicc.gov/usao-az/pr/ffl-owner-sentenced-prison-illel!Rllv-.
proyiding-fir¢am1,-essa-mujarns-a11cg¢d-shoo1er;
6
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 174 of 236

14

owner of an Arizona FFL was sentenced to prison fodllegally selling a .firc&Jl!l to a prohibi'led
person. Tlie next day, thi's individual shot a.Phoenix Police Officer using;a diff'erent weapon. 1r

The ER.El is ari ef(ort tc:i enforce existing provi~ons oftheGCA. It is focused on violations
thai pose a~ inherent pt1blic 5!1fety risk. S\ICh as imnsfcrring a fircann io a prohibited perso11, not
all!)wingATF to conduct an .inspection or f;iili!ls to conduct a backgroµnd checl<. These violations.
when: willful, are n(,t mere ",papeiWOrlc" violations. They P\Jt' the Aliiencan people at riSli by
allowing tireatms to enter the illicit market. • •

.FFLs are afforded robust due process protections througliout the i11specli611. and revocatioi'I
process, as they have been in. the past, FFLs have the ·right to an administrative hC!lriilg, «rid tliey
also can appeal a final license revocation f~r ile 11~ revi_ew .in federal court. Mo£e9ver~ ATF
stiives for transparency .with respect to !~ ins·pecti'on~ process ·so !lie public tan see for ihemselves:
how ATF' enforces the inspecli·on requirements establisherd'by Congress. For example, b'etwecn
,fu1y 2021 arid Dece111ber 2023, ATF lias reyoked the licenses ofjil$t 250 F.FLs under.this Policy.
which amQUnts to l~s than I.~% of the over 16;000 FFLs inspected during thi~ penbd. Aiid,. these:
revocations.are for ,goad cause, since ~ch violation was· found. to be willful. For example. in 2022.
an. FFL was revoked under the Policy after ATF found dozens ot"wiiiful violations thai focfuded
failure to conduct a backgrqund check P,rior to. transferring a firearm on 12 .occasions 'Imel
ttansfetring·a fireann to a·person whci the FPL Jcnew or had reasonable cause to believe was:
federally. prohibited front P.ossessing fiream'ts on ml,)re than one occasiiln. 12 Violations such as
tliese, wlien found 10 be wil!ful, directl)' place ~le public- at sigilificant risk, wliich js Why ATF
musl'act. •

'Ot eoutse, tl\"c cffo~s il'le!)til)n.~ t11)0"0'~ at~ not ~ha~ve: ,they: are. just ~ll\c or tile
examples of ~at we• are doing at ATF to drive violent cri111e down. And despite out, relative
sucaisses,.we know, all too well, that ~~is still muc;h m~ to do. Too many lives ar~being l~t
to gun violence every single day. Last year, more Ulan .40;000. people died from gun violence 'in
ourcountry._And·anotlicr 36,000 suffered gunshot wounds, often with life-changing injuries. These
al'c notj~. nunibers: They are our family .members, friehds. neighbors, and.,most tragically, our
chil~rcn. Indeed_,. gun,viol~cc is nowlhc lca~il):g cause of death for Atnetj~'s children,

Just last week, our nation commemorated Police Week and.bonoted our tall en officers. We
know tfiat; 'far.too often; the victims ofguit violence are lilerribers·ot'law eiifofcement By'sOlne
~ts; in 202'.3, 378 law enforcement offic;ers were shot in the lin~of ~illy, 46 of whom dit:4 fi-otni

1• USAO D. Ariz. Press R,elease, FFL_ Owi1er SeJ1le11ceiJ to Prl,1wifor l{legally:l'ro1•fd/11g ti

Firearm to &so WU/lams., Alleged ShlJoler ofPlloe11ix Polite Dej)of111iem Officer Tyler
Miflt;lm'llt/, (A·ug. 10; 2023) available at https:l/www.justice.aov/usno-az/pr/ffi-owner-sentenced-
prison-jllCRal!y-proyjding-ftrcarm-essa-williams-allcged~shooter. •
11 SeeATF Final Nbtlce or Denial of Applicaiion, Revocation Suspension and/o_r Fine of
F.ireamis License for the Gun Shop (~fay 10, 2022~ ai'Ollabie at
www. atf goy/docs/iJndef'i ned/g_arywi lliamgibbs84Fci-i4948S08pilf/downlpad,
7
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 175 of 236

15

tlieir injuries. 13 .In 2024, this horri.fic trendline is reponedly 11p, with already 136·officers shot,.
focludirig the tragic l9ss of four-law enforcement officers, includirig a Deputy U.S. Marshal; 'in
Nort~ Carolina: as they approached a suspect want~ fQr illegally possessing,a tireann. 14' At ATF.
we respond to every call for assistance·when an.officer is shot or·shot.lit. We suppon our partners
ih their time of nee& just last week, .after the tragi\Hieath of an officer'ih 'Eu~lid, Ohio, one of our
fel!eral law enforcement parln~ called me to emphasize what incredibly iledicat~ partners-ATF
have·beeit in an investigation there.

Last we!lk. I pariicipa1ed in Poli~e Week activities. and I know many of you did as well,
And_. earlier this month; l atlend~ Depuiy U.S. Marshal Weeks' funeraL ~nd last month, I held!
the first-ever Survivors of Oun Violence Su,nmit at ATF HQ, ~ith !amities of viciifns of gul'II
viot,nce from across tlie.Nation.

These sobering ~vents underline why ram liere today. ATf is a small agency .with a liuge
mission: t6·protect the American people .from violent.crime. lfs wliat drives us at ATF. Ir's why
we do everything we can to enmrce the laws Congress has passed. It's why bta\te ATF agents run
toward ·gunfire to protect strangers. It's why ATF inspectors.work tirelessly to educate the FF.L
communities on the i111portance of.t~~ laws governing the transfer of firearms. And it's why ATF'
s~ientists perfect t~ciuiologies !'"'I tecliniques to squeeze ev~fy Q~nce or evi~cn~ to help .law
enforcement solve: crimes: it;s why OU( analysts spe11d /fours scouring clll1a sets to generate
actionable intelligence; and· it's why our professional staff work tirelessly to support every aspect
of this small agency's outsized missi(!n.

Violent crime rates, while still unacceptably high, were down last year: For our part, ATt
criminal enforcement effort~·were up:-with over 4.5%,more defendants indicted and 8.5% m·ore
defendants convicied between ~022 al)d 2023. ~uqljese Cll:_Ses ate not just slatisti~5i th~ have a
ditect"lmpacr on·publlc safei.y. ATF '.is the orrl.y. l'ederar law enforcentenr ag~ncy Whose sole foettsi
is to worlc with po1icund. bt~er Parti!ers 10 protect ;\mej:icans from :violent •criin~wtiether ifs
~y in~icting 4SMinneapolis gang;members·inv<i!v¢ in milrclerand d"'gti'afficking or 7 Sinalo3!
<;:artcl. Members for fen1anyl and tlr~nns trafficking; our enforcement efforts-·a~-having a very-
real effect on violent ~rime.

i'\:lthoug~·great strides we~ m11de last ylla~. w~ mu'st do more.'While violent"crime is down.
it is not the time for celebration. Nor is it the time to curtail or'defund effoits-fhat are working.
Rather, it is th~ ~me to come together; to double arid triple down 011 successfui" sttale~e!i to protect
the American. peopie, Althougii we may have ma~y ditrerericcs, my !lope 'ii WC can alf ~ that
thel~el'of gun !?rime remairis wholly unacc,:eptable in·our couh~. Tog~her we can,.an~ we.miist.
iio more.

All µur efforts are designed tcrredilce violent crime a'nd m'ake ourcorrimutiities s'afenrnng
the tools Conyess 'has.g\ven us. Mr. ChaTnnan, rvJr. Ranking Mem~~r, ·and Memb~ of t~e!
Committee,. tliank you ·again· for inviting ·me ~o testify \oday. t look fOTWatd 19 arty questions you ,
may have al!out AtF and out-mission,
n See Fiatemal Order of Police Press Reiease, 378 Officers siwl in the li11e ofDutyi111011 (Jan.
02, 2024), available-al hltps://fop.net/2024/0l/l78--o1ilcers-shot-in"tlie-line--of-duly-in-2023/. •
u See .Fraternal 0rder of Police, Mo11th/y .Upc!are: Officers Shot wid Killed (May i, 2024);
ai--ai/ab/e . al 11ttps://fop.net/2024/05/fop-monthly-update-shot--and-lrilled-3/.
8
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 176 of 236

16
Chair JORDAN. I will now proceed under the five-minute rule.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Alabama, Mr. Moore.
Mr. MOORE. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I will yield to the gentleman
from Kentucky, Mr. Massie.
Mr. MASSIE. Thank you, Mr. Moore.
Mr. Dettelbach, in February, Chair Biggs and I sent you a letter
concerning the pipe bombs that were discovered in January 6th-
these were pipe bombs from over three years ago-and the inves-
tigation surrounding it. After months without a response, a day be-
fore yesterday, your department finally gave us a nonresponse. To
be clear, the response was wholly inadequate and borders or show-
ing contempt for Congress.
To quote from the letter,
This investigation remains ongoing. Accordingly, pursuant to long-standing
Department of Justice policy, ATF cannot provide details.
It goes on.
This is about the safety of Congress. These bombs were a couple
blocks from here, yet you refuse to answer questions about them.
If you don't have contempt for us, I will give you an opportunity
to respond to some of my questions here today. Are you willing to
answer those questions today?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I'm going to try within the rules which long-
standing rules-I've been in five administrations at the Depart-
ment of Justice, Democrat and Republican, and long-standing pol-
icy of the Department of Justice in both types of the Administra-
tion, on both sides, has been we do not comment on pending inves-
tigations.
Mr. MASSIE. Right. That is a policy. That has not been through
some kind of rulemaking. That is a policy. You can say that to the
media, but you can't say it to Congress. We created your depart-
ment.
How many of the ATF personnel were on the. Capitol premises
on January 6, 2021?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Again, I don't believe I can answer specific
questions about the investigation. I know that this may not relate
to the investigation. So, I know that there were-I wasn't here dur-
ing that period. That predated my time on January 6th, the Janu-
ary 6th attacks. So, I know there were some of the ATF agents who
were called to help protect the Members of Congress. I don't know
how many.
Mr. MASSIE. Well, that is not an acceptable answer. We have
asked you this months ago and you just send us a letter saying you
can't answer that, yet according to a FOIA report obtained by Judi-
cial Watch there were 19 people here. So, for you to say you don't
know or you can't tell us is ludicrous. These are subject to FOIA
reports.
Mr. DETTELBACH. Congress, I am happy to also get back to you
with information. If I don't remember all the numbers at the tip
of my fingers, I'm sorry about that.
Mr. MASSIE. Are you willing to confirm that the pipe bombs
planted at the Capitol Hill Club and the DNC on January 6th
couldn't have gone off with a 60-minute kitchen timer if they were
placed the day before?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 177 of 236

17
Mr. DETIELBACH. Respectfully, Congressman, I do believe that
this does go into the area of the investigation, which is-the ATF
is supporting. The FBI is leading that investigation and I cannot
comment on that.
Mr. MASSIE. We are three years into it. Who was the on-scene
Incident Commander for the ATF on January 6th?
Mr. DETIELBACH. Again, if you're asking about the scene of the
investigation at the headquarters, again-
Mr. MASSIE. You are not going to tell us who the Incident Com-
mander was?
Mr. DETl'ELBACH. I don't know. I'm telling you if that relates to
the scene not here at the Capitol Building where we were pro-
tecting Congresspeople from attack, but to the other investigation
scene, we can try to get back to you. I will tell you if it relates to
a pending investigation, we won't be able to comment.
Mr. MASSIE. Does the ATF provide training to U.S. Capitol Police
on explosive detection, detonation, disarming, or simulation train-
ing exercises with U.S. Capitol Police?
Mr. DETTELBACH. We provide the National Center for Explosives
Training and Research in Huntsville, Alabama-provides training
to numerous different law enforcement agencies. I would not be
surprised if Capitol Police were one of them. I don't know the train-
ing regimen. People are going down there all the time to get train-
ing.
Mr. MASSIE. Were the two pipe bombs on January 6th part of a
training exercise?
Mr. DETIELBACH. I cannot comment on a pending investigation,
but if-
Mr. MASSIE. OK.
Mr. DETIELBACH. In general, I would say-
Mr. MASSIE. Well, then [inaudible]-
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. In general, I would say to that I think if law
enforcement knows if something is part of some sort of a law en-
forcement exercise, they wouldn't be conducting that long of an in-
vestigation, in general, but I don't-
Mr. MASSIE. In my last remaining seconds, I want to show you
a video of something that you said on 60 Minutes.
[Video played.]
Mr. MASSIE. Are you aware it is illegal for you to create a reg-
istry of gun owners in the United States?
Mr. DETl'ELBACH. I am.
Mr. MASSIE. Are you insinuating here that somebody can't buy
a firearm with cash?
Mr. DETIELBACH. No.
Mr. MASSIE. So, why would a dealer-why should a dealer call
you if somebody is going through a background check and tell you
that somebody is using cash?
Mr. DETIELBACH. We run a program called "Don't Lie For the
Other Guy," along with the National Shooting Sports Foundation.
There are indicia of straw purchasing matters where there are
warning signs where people can contact us. Firearms dealers who
are law-abiding business owners, and the majority are-I want to
say that again here-they frequently contact us, especially on the
Southwest border because cartels are using straw purchases to arm
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 178 of 236

18
themselves with the kind of weaponry that results in death and de-
struction, and danger to Americans and law enforcement.
Mr. MASSIE. We are concerned because banks are keeping these
records and giving them to the government without a legal process,
and I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back.
The Chair now recognizes the Ranking Member for five minutes.
Mr. NADLER. Thank you, Mr. Chair. If Republicans were to suc-
ceed in their effort to abolish the ATF, how would that affect public
safety, particularly gun violence in this country?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Protecting Americans from violent crime, in-
cluding firearms violence, was, is, and will always continue to be
the ATF's top priority, and we work in partnership with State and
local law enforcement officials to do that. We investigate the most
dangerous, worst of the worst, the people who are out there, trigger
pullers, and terrorizing our communities. As I said in my opening
statement, the results speak for themselves. Working with our
State and local partners we do a dangerous job, we do it well, and
we catch a lot of very violent people.
The tools we make available to local law enforcement, the crime
gun intelligence which enables them to identify who those people
are better than ever before so we can focus limited law enforcement
resources on catching them is working. It is driving down violent
crime in our cities. That's why everywhere I go in the country, Con-
gressman, everywhere I go: Red State, Blue State, city, and rural,
they ask for more of the ATF resources.
Mr. NADLER. If the Republicans were to succeed in their effort
to abolish the ATF, how would that affect public safety?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Well, all of that would go away.
Mr. NADLER. OK.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. All of that would go away. Our State and local
partners who are asking for more the ATF, they would be robbed
of any of the ATF. All the cases that we do, all the gangs we pros-
ecute, the RICOs, the VICARs, and the cartel cases, all the things
we do would disappear.
Mr. NADLER. Thank you. While some House Republicans have
sought to abolish the ATF, others have sought to defund it or to
reduce its effectiveness through dramatic budget cuts. In fact,
House Republicans have actually bragged about cutting the ATF by
seven percent this year. I understand that the ATF has done an
admirable job despite these budget cuts. For example, the agency
has been able to dramatically reduced, processing times of certain
firearm transfer applications under the National Firearms Act. Can
you describe the impact these cuts have had on the agency and
how slashing funding for the ATF reduces your ability to protect
Americans from gun violence?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Yes. So, the ATF is an agency that is not a
large agency with an outsized mission protecting people from vio-
lent crime, and we have a very focused effective strategy to do that,
but you-sometimes less is more. In law enforcement less is not
more. You can't get public safety on the cheap. The fact of the mat-
ter is that, pursuant to the cuts passed by Congress, we have can-
celed already two classes of special agents this year. Those are
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 179 of 236

19
each 24-agent classes. I fear there will be more cancellations mov-
ing forward.
We have obviously cut people in all job categories. Lab techni-
cians who run DNA tests to try to catch mass killers like happened
in Goshen, California. We are doing our best with what you give
us. We will continue to work to do that, but there's no doubt that
the cuts that have been imposed will have a direct impact on public
safety and the ATF's mission to fight violent crime. No doubt.
Mr. NADLER. Thank you. Last week we heard a great deal from
Republicans about the need to support State and local law enforce-
ment. Can you tell us how the ATF works with and supports State
and local law enforcement?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. There is no better partner in Federal law en-
forcement for State and local police, sheriffs, State police than the
ATF. We stand shoulder to shoulder with local law enforcement
doing the most violent cases that they do.
Everywhere I go, as I said, Congressman, every Chief I talk to,
every sheriff I talk to, it doesn't matter, urban, rural, North, South,
Midwest, and East Coast, they all say the same thing.
Mr. NADLER. Thank you.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. You guys are doing great. Please send more
agents.
Mr. NADLER. Can you explain what a ghost gun or personally
manufactured firearm is, and why such firearms pose a danger to
the American public?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. The ATF's legal responsibility is to implement
the laws that Congress passes. Congress passed the Gun Control
Act. The Gun Control Act talks about the need for those engaged
in the business of selling firearms to have a license. It also talks
about anything that is, quote, "readily convertible to being an oper-
able firearm" falling under the definition of firearm.
So, people who are producing kits that they send out so that peo-
ple can-then you're engaged in the business of doing it. I'm not
talking about an individual hobbyist making a firearm for himself
at home. That's allowed. The people who are selling these kits for
money and saying, "oh, this is not readily convertible to being a
firearm because it's not put together." We evaluate those and the
rule that we promulgated on privately made firearms addresses
that.
Congressman, the number of privately made firearms, which are
untraceable, un-serialized firearms that are used in crimes in a
five-year period went up 1,000-l'm going to say 1,000 percent, 10
times, by a multiple of 10, year over year. There's a reason for that.
The reason for that is felons and violent people. They know they're
going to do something bad. They don't want the firearm to be
traced to them. It's a cold weapon. It's untraceable and it's very
dangerous in the wrong hands.
Mr. NADLER. Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a
May 22nd letter from Assistant Attorney General Carlos Uriarte to
me that explains the risk that un-serialized firearms or ghost guns
pose to the public, their proliferation among guns found at crime
scenes, and the numerous efforts of the Department of Justice to
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 180 of 236

20
reduce violence caused by ghost guns and other firearms and to
promote public safety.
I also ask unanimous consent to enter into the record a March
7th Washington Post article titled, "House Republicans want to
Defund the Police," which outlines how Republican cuts to the FBI
and ATF will harm the important work of State and local law en-
forcement.
Chair JORDAN. Without objection.
Mr. NADLER. Thank you. I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. Mr. Dettelbach, what were you trying to hide?
When the raid on March 19th on Mr. Malinowski's house disabled
the doorbell camera, cut electricity to the house, and you didn't
wear body cameras what were you guys trying to hide?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Mr. Chair, we're not trying to hide things. In
fact, after-
Chair JORDAN. Sure, seems like it.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. After the-
Chair JORDAN. You guys cut electricity to the house?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. After the-
Chair JORDAN. Well, that is not the question.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I'm trying to answer. After the-OK. If there's
no question, that's fine. I'm sorry.
Chair JORDAN. No, that is a question. Did you?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. After the incident we, along with the Little
Rock Police, called for an independent investigation to be done by
the Arkansas State Police and the local prosecutor.
Chair JORDAN. Oh, I asked-
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. That's not trying to hide anything.
Chair JORDAN. I asked three questions. Why did you put the tape
on the doorbell camera? Why did you cut the lights? Why didn't
you wear the body cams? What are you trying to hide?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Mr. Chair, the reason that we called for the in-
vestigation is we're not trying to hide anything. The reason I'm not
going to talk about what's going on in that investigation is to re-
spect its independence and out of fairness. There's a reason for the
Department of Justice policy that's existed for so many decades
about not commenting on pending matters. It's not fair to people
and it risks the perception that people are trying to influence-
Chair JORDAN. Well, how about this one? Why did you ignore the
rules? Because don't the rules say you should only use a no-knock
entrance into a property if it is the only way-if it is the absolute
best way to do it? I could read from Ms. Monaco's directive,
Limit the circumstances in which agents may seek to enter a dwelling pur-
suant to a warrant without complying with the knock and announce rule
because of the risks posed to both law enforcement and civilians.
So, you want to limit this. Why did you guys do it all in 57 sec-
onds?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Respectfully, with respect to what I said before
is that we are not trying to hide anything. An independent agency
is investigating it and we, pursuant to long-standing policy, are not
going to comment.
Chair JORDAN. Director, the Department of Justice has already
told us you guys weren't wearing cameras. I am just asking, why?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 181 of 236

21
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. For the cameras, our body-worn camera pol-
icy-I can talk about that, even-I think I can answer the question
without talking about this case.
Chair JORDAN. You can talk about some things relative to the in-
vestigation, but not others. We want all the answers to what is
going on here.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I will tell you with respect to the body-worn
camera policy the Department of Justice announced that policy.
When it was announced, as we have communicated to your staff
and you, it was announced that it would be phased implementa-
tion. The ATF is implementing that policy. We've implemented it
in just under a third of our field divisions. We have not received
three separate requests for program funding from Congress to do
so, but we are still doing it.
I watched a hearing a couple of weeks ago where your fellow
Chair-
Chair JORDAN. Did the Little Rock police officers who accom-
panied you on this raid-did they wear body cams?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Again, not commenting on this specific case,
but in general the Department of Justice written policy allows local
law enforcement on these types of operations, short-term oper-
ations to follow their own guidelines and policies, if they wish in
body-worn cameras. What I wanted to say is-
Chair JORDAN. Well, the policy was to wear them. They weren't
wearing them that day. We want to know, why? Did you tell them
not to wear them?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Mr. Chair, again, it is simply unfair at this
point wh_ile there's a pending investigation-
Chair JORDAN. It is a simple question. We just want to know why
they weren't following the rules. Their rules say wear body cam-
eras. Your rules say wear body cameras. You weren't wearing body
cameras. I go back to my original question: What were you trying
to hide? We saw the video where you walked up, you put the tape
on the doorbell, we know there were no lights on the foyer, and we
have Ms. Malinowski who can testify to that, and we know you
weren't wearing body cameras. What were you hiding?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Again, Mr. Chair, we're not hiding anything.
With respect to the body-worn camera policy, the people there-
Chair JORDAN. Why, on the 12th, did you not go and search the
home? You were all circled up ready to go, but you-a week before
on the 12th of March you don't go. You went on the 19th. Why did
you decide not to go on the 12th?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Mr. Chair, these operations-and by the way,
we do about 11,000 operations each year. They're very dangerous
operations. The ATF doesn't do anything that is not dangerous.
Well, that's not quite true, but many of them are very, very dan-
gerous. Those operations are handled by people with decades of law
enforcement experience. They plan them-
Chair JORDAN. You have got to admit--'-
Mr. DETIELBACH. -they look at things, and-
Chair JORDAN. Director, you have got to admit this is a little
unique. You got a citizen, the highest paid official in the municipal
government, Little Rock, Arkansas, making $260,000 a year run-
ning the airport, no criminal background history, nothing, and he
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 182 of 236

22
is dead at a pre-dawn raid when it sure looks like you could have
served this search warrant when he wasn't there, but you decided
not to. You decided to wait until he was home when you did it on
March 19th. As a result, Mr. Malinowski is no longer with us.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Well, first, let me just say this, Mr. Chair. Ob-
viously, any time that there's a loss of life that is a profound inci-
dent. Of course, on behalf of just myself, the ATF, and all law en-
forcement we are very sorry when those things happen. Also, an
agent was shot that day. I'm sure you are sorry that occurred also.
Chair JORDAN. Of course.
Mr. DETIELBACH. Of course.
Chair JORDAN. All the more reason to follow the no-knock war-
rant-not to have a no-knock warrant take place and follow the
rules.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Mr. Chair, as somebody who has worked with
law enforcement for decades there's a great temptation when a hor-
rible incident happens to prejudge. Sometimes people even try to
use it to advance agendas. The cops who are in the field and the
family whose-
Chair JORDAN. I just want the answers. My time is expired.
The Chair now recognizes the gentleman from Georgia, Mr.
Johnson, for five minutes.
Mr. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Dettelbach, thank you for your service. Many of my col-
leagues and I have been strong proponents and supporters of the
use of body cameras and funding for those cameras. So, in some
ways it's rather surprising to read that Chair Jordan recently criti-
cized you; he just did it today, about body cameras and what hap-
pened to them, and why they were not being worn. Meanwhile,
House Republican Appropriations Committee Chair Hal Rogers just
last month criticized your budget request for its department-wide
emphasis on equipping Federal agents with body cameras.
Is there anything in response that you would like to say to Chair
Jordan who supports the use of body cameras versus Chair Rogers,
who want to defund the use of body cameras?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Well, it's not my position to get in the middle
of two Chairs, but I will say this: Anybody, Chair Jordan or any-
body-we've been implementing this policy for several years. Any-
body who wants to support it I welcome to the effort and-
Mr. JOHNSON. We need to fund it. Let me just move on because
there has been allegations that this gentleman who we-the Chair
just discussed, Mr. Malinowski, suggesting that he was just a
hobbyist. We call him an unlicensed gun dealer, but they say he
was a hobbyist and a firearms enthusiast. In your opinion, is some-
one who buys and then almost immediately resells at least 150 fire-
arms over a three-year period a hobbyist or an unlicensed gun
dealer? Are they a hobbyist or an unlicensed gun dealer?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. My opinion, your opinion, and others' opinions
are not what counts. What counts is the Federal judge's opinion
who reviewed the search warrant affidavit here and found probable
cause that two separate Federal laws had been violated relating to
unlawful firearms acquisition and dealing.
In that affidavit, which is public, some of the things that are set
forth are that Mr. Malinowski had not obtained a license, that he
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 183 of 236

23
obtained about 150 firearms in the period prior to this incident,
that he sold a good number of them, some one day after he had
obtained them, that one of those firearms was found on the person
of a 15-year-old Norteno gang member in California. Another was
sold in the back seat of a car in Little Rock to a convicted robber.
Others were found on a drug dealer in California, a kilo of mari-
juana, other drugs in the back, baggie, and scales consistent with
distribution.
So, respectfully, these are not victimless crimes and it is up to
Congress and the judge to make that determination. Those agents
were present pursuant to the terms of a Federally judicially ap-
proved warrant. The time they were there was approved.
_Mr. JOHNSON. Let me ask you this-
Mr. DETIELBACH. The day they were there was approved.
Mr. JOHNSON. Let me ask you this: Do you have any idea how
many unlicensed gun dealers just like Mr. Malinowski are oper-
ating in this country selling multiple, tens of hundreds of firearms
yearly?
Mr. DETIELBACH. I don't.
Mr. JOHNSON. Any idea?
Mr. DETIELBACH. We can get back to you with-we recently pub-
lished a National Firearms Trafficking Report that talked about
the fact that the percentage of people who are trafficking in this
manner has now grown to be the number one way that people are
unlawfully dealing firearms. So, 40 percent of all our criminal traf-
ficking cases deal with the notion of people dealing-engaged in the
business of dealing without a license. That has grown over time.
It's growing.
Mr. JOHNSON. OK. Let me get this question in. Prior to your con-
firmation in 2022, there had been a seven-year lapse between con-
firmed ATF directors to the time when you were confirmed. During
that seven-year period the crime rate and violent crime rate in the
country went up and was going up. Then COVID hit which caused
it to recede for a second. Then you were appointed. It is not a mere
coincidence, that your appointment and confirmation has resulted
in a decrease in crime and violent crime?
Mr. DETIELBACH. To me it's the men and women out in the field
who are doing the work. I have the privilege to lead them, and I
give all the credit to the brave ATF agents and police officers who
are risking their lives. Thank you. Thank you for saying this, but
it really is them who's doing the work.
Mr. JOHNSON. Well, without leadership it is hard to get things
done, and I thank you for your leadership.
Mr. DETIELBACH. Thank you.
Mr. JOHNSON. With that, I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from Texas is recognized.
Mr. NEHLS. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
I believe with us today-Ms. Malinowski, if you are out there,
would you please stand? I would like to recognize you, Ms.
Malinowski. First, name is Maer.
Director, would you like to stand up and look at her and apolo-
gize?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 184 of 236

24
Mr. DETIELBACH. I've already said, of course, whenever these
things happen, it's a tragedy.
Mr. NEHLS. Yes.
Mr. DETIELBACH. Of course, we're sorry. Everybody is sorry that
this occurred.
Mr. NEHLS. Yes, look at her. Don't look at me.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. It doesn't mean that-I'm trying to also speak
into the microphone. It doesn't mean that we can adjudicate this
here today. There's an investigation going on. Of course, everybody
feels bad. I'm sure that a Federal agent was shot, not shot at, shot
that day. Those things are hard facts for all of us.
Mr. NEHLS. OK. All right. Thank you, Maer.
First, I want to enter something into the record. Your testimony,
you say guns are the leading cause of death for children in the U.S.
Not according to Snopes. It is a far-left publication. It is traffic
crashes.
Could I have that entered into the record?
Mr. ISSA. [Presiding] Without objection.
Mr. NEHLS. Thank you so very much.
I was a sheriff, eight years, in law enforcement 30, conducted a
lot of search warrants. My agency and I would not allow for no-
knocks. Just didn't allow it, because what we have seen over the
past several years. When you have these SWAT teams looking like
ninjas coming to doors at 6:00 in the morning, it just could cause
some problems. You stated in your testimony just a few minutes
ago 11,000 of these a year. Very dangerous. Very dangerous. Done
with very experienced agents, right? What policies do you have
when you are going to execute search warrants, arrest warrants to
mitigate risk? Mitigate risk.
Mr. DETIELBACH. Yes, so, Congressman, first, we do a very, very
thorough job of training, which is of course, as you know as a
Chair, very important. Second, we have operations planning. We
have review of....:..
Mr. NEHLS. Thank you. Executing a search warrant pre-dawn,
early in the morning, knowing people are going to be in bed, how
does that mitigate risk, especially when you do it and it is a no-
knock?
Mr. DETIELBACH. So, Congressman, as a former sworn sheriff, I
assume you would agree with me that police are entitled to due
process also.
Mr. NEHLS. Well, I tell you what it appears to me is what I have
seen from the Federal Government, whether it is the ATF or the
FBI doing search warrants or arrest warrants on J6ers, going in
there with flash-bangs, with the big BearCats-I had a BearCat;
I know what it is-and having agents come out looking like they
are ninja turtles for combat, I think not only are you scaring the
hell out of the entire neighborhood, but when you kick down or
break down a door, and you don't even announce who you are,
what do you think is going to happen? This was Mr. Malinowski
there trying to protect his family. He didn't know. If you had called
him, sir, had a casual conversation-were you aware that he had
no criminal history?
Mr. DETIELBACH. Sheriff-
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 185 of 236

25
Mr. NEHLS. I just want to ask a question. Are you aware, did you
know the gentleman had no criminal history, no prior-
Mr. DETIELBACH. Am I aware sitting here?
Mr. NEHLS. Yes, were you aware of it?
Mr. DETIELBACH. In firearms trafficking cases and people who
are dealing without a license and buying 150 firearms-
Mr. NEHLS. I am sure there are a lot of bad hombres out there.
Mr. DETIELBACH. -they would not have a criminal-
Mr. NEHLS. I am trying to focus on Mr. Malinowski. Were you
personally aware that he didn't have a criminal history?
Mr. DETIELBACH. Again, I'm trying to answer the question di-
rectly.
Mr. NEHLS. Well, obviously it is quite clear you weren't. It is
quite clear you weren't. I want to talk about mitigating risk. Were
you aware-were your agents wearing body cameras that day?
Mr. DETIELBACH. Again, I've tried to say this. I'd like the chance
to answer this. The entire field division that covers Arkansas had
not yet been phased in-
Mr. NEHLS. You have a budget. Try to convince the American
people you don't have the do-re-mi to put body cameras on your
agents that are conducting 11,000 warrants? These dangerous by-
you have got 11,000 of them out there and you had a budget last
year of $1.672 billion with a "B." You are telling me "I am sorry,
folks, I can't provide this transparency to American people. I can't
because I don't have the budget to do so." The American people-
there is a problem right now with law enforcement out there. I
have the picture and the image of every law enforcement officer
that has been killed in the past 3½ years and there are way too
many. There are way too many on my wall.
Mr. DETIELBACH. We agree.
Mr. NEHLS. So, we have body-worn cameras. Why do we do that?
Because there is a lack of trust between the police and the commu-
nities they serve. So, when you provide these cameras there is no
"he said, she said." It is all on record. You didn't have your body
cameras on that day? I am telling you it stinks to high heaven. I
highly, highly recommend you cooperate with this Committee and
you try to explain, other than this I don't have the money to do so
and I am phasing it in. Buddy, you got to get your priorities-re-
shuffie your priorities and get your priorities in order. I highly rec-
ommend you get body cameras on every one of those individuals
that are serving these warrants, because it seems like there is a
cover up here. I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. [Presiding] The gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from California, Mr. Correa, is recognized for five
minutes.
Mr. CORREA. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you for holding this
most important hearing.
Director Dettelbach, thank you for being here today.
Ms. Malinowski, I just want to say prayers are with you, with
your family in this very difficult moment. I hope beyond the heated
debate that we are having here today we actually come up with
better public policies to minimize the loss of life in these public
safety enforcement actions.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 186 of 236

26
I also, Mr. Dettelbach, would like to know what it is going to
take to get those body cameras out in the field? How fast can we
do it?
Mr. DETIELBACH. We have them across a third of the United
States having received no program increase at all. We take them-
we take that money, and we balance it with stopping gangs that
are killing people, stopping cartels, as Chair Rogers point out with,
that are the most dangerous organizations in the world, going after
trigger pullers, homicide cases, and carjackings. So, we have made
programmatic requests that are open to the public; 13 in 2023, 37.8
million-
Mr. CORREA. How fast can we get them out to the other two-
thirds that don't have body cameras?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Right. I'm saying we have a pending request
for a programmatic increase of $37 .8 million. It's the same request
we made last year that was not given-
Mr. CORREA. How long do you think it is going to take to imple-
ment? How long will this take to implement?
Mr. DETIELBACH. Currently, with what we have now, without
anything else, we will be implemented across the country by end
of 2026. If there's more resources, we can try to speed that up. It's
notjust-
Mr. CORREA. I, as a Member of Congress, hope I am speaking for
a few folks here, hope that we can expedite body cams being worn
by our agents out there. This is an important issue. Love to work
with you, however, we can make sure that happens.
If I may, I am going to ask you my first question, which is how
do you guys work with State, local, international agencies to pro-
tect your public?
Mr. DETIELBACH. Congressman-
Mr. CORREA. You were out in Orange County recently, my part
of the town.
Mr. DETIELBACH. I was. We have to recognize-worked with the
Orange County Violent Crime Task Force, which is a great exam-
ple of how we work shoulder to shoulder with a variety of local po-
lice departments. What we do is target the worst of the worst.
There was a case out there I remember hearing about. It was a se-
ries of Hobbs Act robberies that resulted in the death and murder
of clerks at 7-Elevens, I believe. That's a case where we partner
with local law enforcement.
The ATF has a little bit of a different way of doing this. If the
most appropriate punishment is in the State court and it's murder,
that's fine with us. We're not looking for necessarily only Federal
cases. We look to do the case-
Mr. CORREA. Director, let me interrupt you. I have got a couple
more questions here.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Sure. Of course.
Mr. CORREA. August 22nd, I sent you a letter requesting your
help, your partnership specifically on a gun buyback program, vol-
untary gun buyback program that we implemented in my district.
Didn't get the support there. It is important because this is a pro-
gram where citizens voluntarily show up, free market. Here is 200
bucks. Here is a weapon I had at home that I haven't touched in
40 years. Have you been working on those or what is it that we
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 187 of 236

27
can do to get you to work with us on those very successful pro-
grams?
Mr. DETTELBACH. So, with those programs-and I think of
course, we value public safety, and we value State and local agen-
cies' determinations of what protects them.
With respect to gun buyback programs, that's usually a decision
and a program run by the State and local agencies, not the Federal
agencies.
Mr. CORREA. They need your help in executing those.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Well, sometimes agencies can and do apply for
Byrne grant money that can support their comprehensive plans,
but the ATF does not get involved in the actual operation of gun
buyback programs. That is done by State and local authorities.
Mr. CORREA. We will talk some more later, but I do think these
are important programs. You get guns off the street, guns that peo-
ple don't want anymore. They would rather have $100-$200 in
their hand as opposed to a weapon. Cost-effective. Nobody gets
hurt. We do need your help. It is local, but we need the ATF's data-
base to make sure when those guns are brought back, we can run
them through a database to see if they have been involved in any
crimes, to make sure that those are guns that we can take off the
street without destroying evidence. Go ahead, sir. I have got a few
seconds.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. No, Congressman, thank you. We will work
with you. I commit to you that we will get back to you and your
staff on that.
Mr. CORREA. Thank you.
Mr. Chair, I yield the rest of my time.
Mr. !SSA. [Presiding] I thank the gentleman. I recognize myself
now.
Director, you accused a dead man of a crime of illegally selling
in the backseat a weapon. Would I hear that correctly?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Respectfully, what I did was talked about the
public search warrant affidavit that was filed and approved by the
judge.
Mr. ISSA. No, no, I understand, you are standing by your search
warrant. You are standing by the fact that in the search warrant,
you are alleging that he had committed a crime. Is that correct?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Chair, respectfully, I was making the point
that a Federal magistrate-
Mr. !SSA. No, no, you are not being respectful. Answer the ques-
tion. The question is, did you allege that he had committed a Fel-
ony, a crime, in your affidavit?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. The judge did find that.
Mr. ISSA. OK, I will take that as the judge found it because you
alleged it. So, you alleged a crime, but you didn't seek to arrest
him, did you?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Again?
Mr. ISSA. Did you have an arrest warrant for Mr. Malinowski-
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. My understanding-
Mr. ISSA. That is a yes or no, Director.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. My understanding is that there was not an ar-
rest warrant. I don't have the full investigative file, but that is my
understanding.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 188 of 236

28
Mr. ISSA. You came here, you knew we were going to ask, you
saw yesterday. Now, you are playing one of the games that the
Chair and I didn't like during Fast and Furious, we don't like it
now. If you want to be back here again because you can't seem to
know what you should know, what Ms. Malinowski deserves to
know.
If some group of ten carloads of people showed up and kicked in
a door in the dark of night, and somebody came and shot at them,
we wouldn't be talking about somebody getting shot in the toe, we
would be talking exclusively about a planned murder of somebody,
who may or may not be armed, but who had every right to have
weapons in their home, an expectation they had weapons in their
home, an expectation that they might use it.
All of that you don't have to be ATF to know. So, let's get back
on track here again. If you had a belief that he had committed a
crime, and if your intent was to arrest him, then that would ex-
plain why a week earlier, you have called off an already authorized
search because you were only going to search for the weapons, you
weren't going to search for him. Isn't that correct?...
Mr. DETTELBACH. Respectfully, Mr. Chair, I am not able and will
not, it is not fair to do this during the pendency of a criminal inves-
tigation.
Mr. ISSA. No, no, look, it is always-I am sorry, but the DOJ and
you guys, it is always, you can go on forever. Hunter Biden is over,
why didn't you do a no-knock on him at his home with the Vice
President?
Mr. DETTELBACH. To be clear, this isn't our investigation. We and
the Little Rock Police asked for an outside investigation be con-
ducted by the Arkansas State Police. It is their investigation. The
District Attorney is going to review that.
Mr. ISSA. I hope they appropriately find that in spite of qualified
immunity, that you blew it badly enough that, in fact, criminal
charges should be considered.
Mr. DETTELBACH. I hope they just find whatever the truth is.
Mr. ISSA. What is the-what is the penalty for the crime alleged
on the affidavit, for selling a weapon not as a licensed dealer?
What is the penalty?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Oh, my Lord, Mr. Chair, I believe it is a 10-
year felony. There are two different crimes. Those might be a five-
year and a 10-year felony.
Mr. ISSA. OK.
Mr. DETTELBACH. I want to get back to you to make sure. There
is a series of statutes that run all in a row there. I want to make
sure I am not mixing up the statutes.
Mr. ISSA. It is five years, or it is 10 years. It is not a death pen-
alty, is that correct?
Mr. DETTELBACH. There is not a death penalty for that statute,
no.
Mr. ISSA. OK, so Mr. Malinowski was not in any danger of being
executed for what he is alleged to have done and no longer can de-
fend himself because he is dead. He was killed doing what any nor-
mal citizen does when people enter their home in the dark of night
and they don't know who they are.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 189 of 236

29
If you had body cameras, maybe Ms. Malinowski didn't hear
right. Maybe you said "Police," and identified yourself. Maybe he
said, "I don't care," and maybe he fired the shots. I don't believe
that, and I don't think you do either.
I believe he had every real belief that he was defending his wife
and family. He fired warning shots. A ricochet hit a police officer
or an ATF agent, and you killed him. Those are the facts.
I have been investigating ATF for many years, and the ATF
agents have, rightfully so, and with great trepidation I am sure,
come forth and been our whistleblowers.
We have consistently seen there are two ATFs: The one we need
and want and deserve, and the one that plays fast and loose, like
ten cars going in deliberately with a warrant that did not entitle
an arrest. When in fact if you wanted to arrest him, it would have
been reasonable to arrest him at work and simultaneously go into
his home.
If you had done that, he would be alive today and we would be
talking about other things, including whether you acted legally.
With that, I yield back and recognize Ms. Scanlon for five min-
utes.
Ms. SCANLON. Thank you, Chair. Thank you, Director, for your
testimony here today.
The Ranking Member mentioned that every single day 120
Americans are shot and killed, and more than 200 are wounded
with gunfire. Those numbers are statistics; everyone is an Amer-
ican with a family, neighbors, and friends.
Yesterday morning at 8:30 a.m., a gunman killed two people and
injured three others are a small, family owned business in Chester,
Pennsylvania, right down the street from my office. Five people
were shot, their coworkers and community were traumatized, just
for showing up at work in the morning.
This unrelenting, unnecessary daily toll of gun violence is hitting
families in every corner of every community across our country.
Yesterday, it happened in Chester, a post-industrial city that strad-
dles Interstate 95, which is known in law enforcement as the Iron
Pipeline because it is the route that gun traffickers regularly use
to smuggle weapons from States with weak gun laws to States with
stricter ones.
The senseless violence is outrageous, but it is not inevitable.
There are things we can do. This violence is enabled by lawmakers
who choose to do nothing, who block legislation in the wake of trag-
edy after tragedy, while the American people are crying out for real
action.
Whenever Democrats try to explore how Congress can act to
stem this uniquely American carnage, our Republican colleagues
say the solution is to enforce the laws that are already on the
books. Here we are once again in a hearing in which Republicans
are attacking the ATF, the law enforcement agency charged with
primary responsibility for enforcing gun safety laws across our
country.
It comes while our Republican colleagues have bills to abolish the
ATF and have succeeded in getting cuts to its budget.
So, Director Dettelbach, I want to turn our focus to what might
be real solutions and your agency's role in helping to implement
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 190 of 236

30
them. You spoke in your testimony about a 1,000 percent increase
in ghost guns linked to crimes over the past five years.
Whenever I speak to our local law enforcement, including last
night, they talk to me about how worried they are about the rapid
proliferation of ghost guns. Ghost gun recoveries increased by over
400 percent in Philadelphia between 2019-2021.
Our Delaware County Police busted a gun trafficker who was
building and testing ghost guns in an apartment across the street
from our county courthouse. Our Montgomery County Police re-
cently busted a whole ghost gun trafficking ring.
These fully functioning, untraceable firearms can be bought with-
out a background check. They can be ordered online, and in less
than an hour become a firearm as deadly as any sold by a gun
dealer. That is why they have become, as you noted, the weapon
of choice for people who might be otherwise barred from purchasing
a gun for criminals.
So, am I correct that ghost guns look like regular guns and shoot
like regular guns and kill like regular guns?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. You are.
Ms. SCANLON. OK. Now, can you explain why they are posing
such a danger to the American public, and why the ATF deter-
mined it was necessary to issue a rule amending the definition of
frame or receiver to ensure that ghost guns are treated like other
equally lethal firearms under our laws?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Congresswoman, the reason is as you said,
under our laws. Under the Gun Control Act, Congress specifically
provided that items that were readily convertible to being operable
firearms should be treated as firearms. The market was out there
producing items that were readily convertible, and they were being
sold without background checks.
I actually, I did myself, I took one of these kits and put the gun
together. My spouse will tell you I don't-I am not that handy
around the house. It was very easy for me to make a firearm, take
it to the range, and fire it.
These are firearms that shoot and would kill, like firearms that
are sold in the traditional manner. Congress anticipated that prob-
lem. The market changed, and we issued a rule to make sure that
Congress's statute was appropriately enforced.
Ms. SCANLON. We appreciate that, given the constant innovation
that we see from gun manufacturers and those who seek to evade
the existing laws. If we were to wait for Congress to catch up all
the time, we would be in a lot of trouble.
Chair, I would ask unanimous consent to enter into the record
a letter from the ATF's Acting Deputy Assistant Director for Public
and Governmental Affairs, in which he responded to your letter re-
garding the execution of the search warrant on Mr. Malinowski's
residence and about the ATF's compliance with DOJ's body-worn
camera policy.
Chair JORDAN. [Presiding] Without objection.
Ms. SCANLON. OK. Just so you are aware of which letter it is,
it is the one from May 21st, that responded to your request, which
you referenced earlier.
Chair JORDAN. Without objection.
Ms. SCANLON. Thank you. It discusses the funding necessary.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 191 of 236

31
Chair JORDAN. Got it.
Ms. SCANLON. Got it. I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentlelady yields back. The gentleman from
Florida is recognized.
Mr. GAETZ. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
So, the ATF has a final rule. I think the comments and the rule
itself accumulate to about 466 pages that define who is engaged in
the business of firearms dealing.
So, how many firearms does someone have to see to be engaged
in the business of firearm dealing? •
Mr. DETTELBACH. Congressman, as you know, that matter is
being litigated in several courts. So, sticking to what is already in
the public record, the rule itself is 16 pages, skipping lines. There
is about, as you say, over 400 pages of explanation.
Mr. GAETZ. Yes.
Mr. DETTELBACH. So, there are factors that are conduct-based,
not numerical-based but conduct-based. There is also, we received
many comments. One of the comments that we received was from
I think Senator Cornyn, who expressed a view that there was no
numerical threshold. Others had a different view.
Mr. GAETZ. Yes, yes, in the House Judiciary Committee we prob-
ably won't look to Senator Cornyn as the oracle of all things gun
rights. So, you are saying there really is no number.
Mr. DETTELBACH. I am saying that Congress-our job is to imple-
ment the statute that Congress writes.
Mr. GAETZ. Yes, yes, no, but just like for a regular person-
Mr. DETTELBACH. Congress didn't put-
Mr. GAETZ. For a regular person that one or another acquires
guns, and they are trying to figure out how many of these guns do
I sell before I have to register as a dealer. What you are saying is
there is no bright line there.
Mr. DETTELBACH. I am saying that there is now more informa-
tion than ever in the form of that rule for specific conduct-based-
Mr. GAETZ. No, just for a regular person, more information than
ever is probably less helpful than if you sell three guns, you are
not a dealer, and if you sell four guns, then you are a dealer, right.
This rule that you guys have drafted, it is currently enjoined,
right? It has no effect?
Mr. DETTELBACH. There are three cases that I know of, maybe
more going on now. One of the judges has issued equitable relief.
Mr. GAETZ. So, in Texas, a judge has stopped the implementation
of this law for three reasons.
First, that there is no minimum requirement. The court has
found, this court in Texas, that you are just giving effect and life
to Congress' statutes.
Second, you have in fact exceeded your authority. Because Con-
gress would have never allowed some sort of sliding scale where 16
pages of single spaced whatever determines whether or not you are
a firearm dealer, not how many guns you sell.
Third, that the court in Texas said that this would not have an
effect, and it is that actual profit is not a requirement of the stat-
ute, only the predominant intent for profit.
How do you understand that ruling?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 192 of 236

32

Mr. DETTELBACH. Again, that is in litigation. The Department of

Justice's position on each and every one of these matters is public,
it is laid out in many, many pages of briefing. So, I would ask peo-
ple to look at our briefs that we filed in the court. I would com-
mend your attention to that.
Mr. GAETZ. If just someone is just trying to figure out whether
or not they have to get a Federal license or be subject to your guys
breaking their doors down and potentially killing them, you would
think that you would want that to be easily understandable.
Here, even if someone isn't turning a profit but they might want
to turn a profit, they could be subject to this regulation, and the
court found that troubling.
The third reason the court identified is that your rule doesn't
just give meaning to Congress' statute, but that "arbitrarily evis-
cerates the safe harbor provision." So, there is a safe harbor provi-
sion in this law that says if you are just engaged in the occasional
sale or exchange or purchase of a firearm for a personal collection
or a hobby, that this wouldn't, this regulatory structure wouldn't
affect you.
What the court is saying here in blocking your rule is that you
have eviscerated the safe harbor that exists for the hobbyist. Do
you have a reaction to that ruling?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Again, yes. Our position is not that, but it is
under litigation. We have filed extensively-
Mr. GAETZ. Here we are; make your argument. They are sitting
here in court trying to figure out what Congress means. What we
are saying is there should definitely be a bright line in terms of
guns. You shouldn't have to have this pondering question about
profit motive, and you shouldn't eviscerate the safe harbor. That is
what we are saying.
So, what is your argument as to why the safe harbor should be
eviscerated?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Our argument is to look at the statute that
Congress wrote. The statute that Congress wrote, and I just want
to make clear that people understand this, there was an earlier
comment about the word ''livelihood." That is not in the law any-
more that Congress wrote. Congress took that out of the law, it
doesn't exist anymore.
So, we start with that statute. That is where things always begin
and end-
Mr. GAETZ. I know you started with the statute, but what this
court is saying is that you have exceeded the statute. You have
done it in a way that eviscerates the safe harbor, that blurs the
lines, and that creates no discernable way for people to comply
with law.
The reason I think you guys are doing that is you want to make
it more difficult for people to engage in the legal, lawful, and con-
stitutionally contemplated manner to transfer firearms. You are
trying to criminalize an entire enterprise. That is why you see us
trying to curtail some of your funding and your authority.
I see my time is expired, Mr. Chair, I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back. The gentlelady from
Georgia is recognized.
Ms. MCBATH. Thank you, Chair.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 193 of 236

33
Thank you, Director Dettelbach, thank you for coming before the
Judiciary Committee again. I really appreciate it. I know that the
work that you do really saves lives, I know that. It protects our
communities and helps many of us sleep a little bit better at night,
and me in particular.
I for one, as well as many of my colleagues here, we do truly un-
derstand that the ATF plays a pivotal role in preventing gun vio-
lence by removing gun traffickers from our neighborhoods, ensur-
ing that only lawful and abiding gun owners can purchase fire-
arms, and assisting law enforcement at every level in solving gun
crimes.
This Committee has many field hearings on victims of violent
crimes. Well, it is the ATF's job to do so, to do that very thing, to
bring our perpetrators to-that are violent crimes, to bring them
to justice.
The most logical thing for us to do today is find ways to support
you, to support the ATF's mission to reduce violent gun crimes. We
should not defund, or we should not abolish the ATF, the very
agency that is actually eliminating any semblance of need for a vic-
tims of violent crime hearing anywhere in this country.
Today, we need to hear from you, Director, if you can just tell
us, and we need to find out from you, how we can actually assist
you and support the ATF and its mission to reduce illegal firearm
use and purchases, eliminate firearm threats, and protect our fami-
lies, friends, and fellow Americans.
Director Dettelbach, the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act, the
most significant gun safety legislation that we have had in almost
30 years, has made tremendous progress. I have been monitoring
the progress of this package of work in eliminating gun violence as
a public health crisis.
The initiatives that have been set forth in this law include parts
of my plan for the implementation of extreme risk protection or-
ders, those programs. Also, laws that ensure that firearms are not
in the hands of those in court who have been found through the
due process to be a danger to themselves or to the community.
Then, also, funding for community violence interventions in that
package of work as well, and working to close the gun show loop-
hole.
My colleagues, Director Dettelbach, have touched on how the
ATF cuts have affected State and local law enforcement. Would you
like to expand on that for us? Because this is really important, crit-
ical information that the country really needs to hear.
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. Protecting Americans from violent crime is at
the core of everything we do at the ATF. That means that so many
of our strategies and resources depend on supporting local law en-
forcement. Sheriffs' departments, police departments, and State po-
lice, I go and meet with those folks everywhere I go all the time.
The things that we do help them to close homicide cases, arrest
gang members, get carjackers in Philadelphia off the street. Stop
the outhbound flow of firearms through our nine trafficking strike
forces on the border to the cartels that present a danger to public
safety in all those towns for all those sheriffs across the border.
We do all those things every day. On top of it, our CGICs and
our Crime Gun Intelligence Centers, which are being put up all
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 194 of 236

34
over the country, are places where local, State, and Federal agents
sit together, often with prosecutors, and evaluate violent crime
cases in real time, so that the next morning we can be out on the
streets investigating the most violent people.
Budget cuts make all that less and harder. Everybody wants a
CGIC. We can't give everybody a CGIC because we don't have
enough money for that. If we cut more money, we are cutting those
Crime Gun Intelligence Centers that lead to operations that day,
the next day, or the next week that get violent criminals off the
street.
Ms. MCBATH. So, am I correct in understanding that you need
full support and funding of the ATF?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Yes, not just me, the agents who are out there
risking their lives need and deserve that support.
Ms. MCBATH. Might I say, being a mother who lost her son to
gun violence, I will tell you that law enforcement worked very hard
on our behalf. I know they do this work every single day. I am just
really grateful for the ATF. I am grateful for the law enforcement.
I am grateful for those that are on the front lines every single
day doing everything that you express. Because it is vital, it is nec-
essary, and this is a public health crisis. Thank you for the work
that you are doing and all the agents and people that work with
you to keep our communities safe.
I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentlelady yields back. The gentleman from
Arizona is recognized.
Mr. BIGGS. Thank you. Director, have you ever been a cop?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Excuse me?
Mr. BIGGS. Have you ever been a cop?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I have not been a police officer. I was a pros-
ecutor.
Mr. BIGGS. Yes, so you don't have decades of law enforcement ex-
perience, but you said you worked with law enforcement, right?
That is fair to say, right?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I was a prosecutor for over 20 years in five dif-
ferent offices.
Mr. BIGGS. You worked with law enforcement, you weren't law
enforcement. So, is it common for the ATF to turn off the power
to a location prior to executing a search warrant?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Is it common for us to do that?
Mr. BIGGS. Yes.
Mr. DETTELBACH. I do not believe it is a common thing that we
do.
Mr. BIGGS. You are the Director. You either know it is common
or you don't know whether it is common.
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. I thought I answered the question, I am sorry.
Mr. BIGGS. Is it common?
Mr. DETTELBACH. My understanding is it is not common. I want
to be very careful to say I am not commenting on any case. Because
I am not sure, until the facts come in-
Mr. BIGGS. Did I ask you about a specific case, sir? I did not, did
I? I asked you about policy. You just said it is not common.
Next, does the ATF use RF frequency jamming technology to pre-
vent the internet and cellphones from working-
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 195 of 236

35
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Sir, sir, I am sorry.
Mr. BIGGS. Does the ATF use RF frequency jamming technology
to prevent the internet and cellphones from working during the
execution of a search warrant?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Again, I am not going to sit here, and I guess
I maybe should have said this before, and comment on that tactics
that we use when we go into dangerous places, because it provides
a blueprint for criminals to hurt us.
Mr. BIGGS. So, let's get this straight then. You told us you won't
answer anything specifically about a case. Now, you are saying you
are not going to tell us generically.
Mr. DETTELBACH. We could-maybe we can contact your staff in
a private setting and have a conversation instead of broadcasting
for all the criminals what-
Mr. BIGGS. Does the ATF use dynamic entry as their means for
entry during the execution of a search warrant?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Again-
Mr. BIGGS. Does the ATF still use dynamic entry as their means
for entry during the execution of a search warrant?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Again, I don't think it is appropriate. We can
communicate with you on these kinds of training issues. I just don't
want to give a public blueprint for people tomorrow and the next
day who are going to be facing law enforcement through the door
to know how we are coming, what we are doing.
Mr. BIGGS. Do you assess pattern of life as part of risk assess-
ment conducted prior to executing a search warrant? Can you an-
swer that one?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I think that is far enough afield that I could
say depending on the case, we can assess pattern of life at times,
of course. Depends on the case, right? Some cases it is appropriate,
some cases it is not.
These are careers-I don't do this, right. The career law enforce-
ment people, as you pointed out, do this with decades of experience.
I don't armchair quarterback them either.
Mr. BIGGS. Here is the deal: You are the Director, and I would
expect that you would know what the policy is. It looks to me, you
have convinced me that maybe Mr. Nehls was right. I am not sure
that I thought he was right.
You didn't want to tell us specifically about the Malinowski case.
I got that. I think it is wrong, I think it is a false narrative. Then
when we start asking you, I start asking you about policies, generic
policies, now all of the sudden you don't want to answer those.
So, when you coordinate with local law enforcement prior-you
do coordinate with local law enforcement prior to the execution of
a search warrant.
Mr. DETTELBACH. In most cases, yes. Certainly, most of our cases
we are doing shoulder to shoulder with law enforcement and
local-
Mr. BIGGS. These are yes-or-no questions. Thank you for answer-
ing yes. Is it the ATF's practice to instruct law enforcement part-
ners to turn off their body cameras when participating in search
warrants with the ATF?
Mr. DETTELBACH. The ATF's written policies that are in our
MOUs is that if a local law enforcement agency has a body-worn
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 196 of 236

36
camera policy and we are going on one of these short-term oper-
ations, they are entitled to follow their own policy if they wish.
That is in black and white.
Mr. BIGGS. Can you tell us the difference on how the ATF would
handle a search warrant on a violent felon versus an individual
who allegedly sold a few firearms without a license? Is there a dis-
tinction in your mind? Is that in your ATF's approach?
Mr. DETTELBACH. In every case, we do risk assessment, and it is
dependent on all the facts and circumstances of any particular mat-
ter. So, in every case we do it, but you can't boil it down to one
or two things. It is a risk assessment that experts who are risking
their lives conduct.
Mr. BIGGS. How does the ATF balance the need for operational
security and the need for safety to the public?
Mr. DETTELBACH. We have to do-you are asking about bal-
ancing. I think you said operational security. We have to keep the
public safe, that is obviously paramount. Police officers are entitled
to go home alive at the end of their shift also. We also have to
make sure that we are doing that as well, you have to do both.
Mr. BIGGS. So, you didn't answer the question. The question pre-
supposed exactly what you just said. We know that you have to
balance it. How do you balance it? That is the question, how do you
balance it?
Mr. DETTELBACH. The answer is both are paramount, and we
have to do both in each operation. I will tell you this: There is no
such thing for a police officer as no risk. They sign up, we sign up,
and the agents sign up to risk their lives. They often go into very
dangerous situations to do that.
So, there is no way to mitigate all their risk, sometimes very
dangerous risk, from any operation.
Mr. BIGGS. We understand that, and we appreciate that. Now, I
have to say that you didn't Mr. Massie's and my letter, our letters
to you. I am hoping that you said you are going to give us addi-
tional responses to the questions I have asked you today. I would
anticipate that you would give more fulsome answers than you
gave us regarding the bomb, pipe bombing issue.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back. The gentlelady from
Washington is recognized.
Ms. JAYAPAL. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Director Dettelbach, thank you for being here. One major cause
of migration into the United States is instability and violence in
parts of Central America, which is partly fueled by the flow of fire-
arms from the United States into Mexico, Central America, and the
Caribbean.
The ATF reported than more than half of crime guns recovered
in Central America, 70 percent of crime guns in Mexico, and 80
percent of crime guns in Caribbean countries are sourced from the
United States, fueling instability and migration.
My Republican colleagues have refused to support commonsense
gun safety legislation that would fight the flow of American guns
across the Southern border and help address the root causes of mi-
gration. Instead, House Republicans have continued to criticize the
Bureau, undermine resources to allow officers to do their jobs, and
oppose commonsense gun safety legislation at almost every turn.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 197 of 236

37
Could you describe any recent or current trends that the ATF
has found regarding the flow of firearms from the United States
into Mexico and Central America?
Mr. DETIELBACH. So, the ATF's job obviously includes firearms
trafficking. One of the types of firearms we are seeing, right, there
is domestic firearms trafficking that goes to California, New York,
and places all over the country. There is also Southbound firearms
trafficking.
It is accurate to say, and we shouldn't be reticent to say it, it is
the truth, that our firearms that are going across the border South-
bound are helping to arm the cartels.
Ms. JAYAPAL. That is right.
Mr. DETIELBACH. So, what do see? We have nine task forces that
are Southbound task forces set up along the border. They work
with State and local law enforcement, they work with the DHS.
We have the opposite problem, right. Other people are trying to
stop things from coming North, we are focused on stopping fire-
arms trafficking going South. They are related sometimes.
Congresswoman, what we see is that criminal organizations, in-
cluding the cartels, are using our freedoms against us.
So, they are developing straw purchasing networks, for instance,
where they are going into firearms stores and sending somebody in
there without a record, paying them a small amount of money, and
getting them to buy large, military-grade weapons, 1950s that can
be easily converted to machine guns down South. Paying in cash
and doing it over and over and over again.
So, what are we doing? We are working with firearms licensees
across the Southwest border and now increasingly elsewhere. Be-
cause the cartels adapt, right? One of the things you asked about
trends, they are going elsewhere now, not just on the Southwest
border. They are going to other States to try to arm themselves.
So, these are disturbing trends. These are very sophisticated and
vicious organizations. The ATF and our partners are doing every-
thing we can. Interdictions, Southbound interdictions, are up in
double digits year over year. We are very proud of that.
We should not fool ourselves that the problem is solved. These
are very wealthy, aggressive, and violent entities.
Ms. JAYAPAL. Thank you. When you were here last year, we dis-
cussed your partnership with State and local law enforcement to
implement the Stop Illegal Trafficking in Firearms Act, which Con-
gress included in the 2022 Bipartisan Safer Communities Act.
You have spoken about some elements, but could you provide any
other additional update on your extensive efforts to implement that
legislation?
Mr. DETIELBACH. Yes. So, there were two separate criminal stat-
utes that Congress created. One of them was a straw purchasing
statute, first ever. The other is a trafficking statute. Both have
been exceedingly useful, both in individual cases of firearms traf-
ficking, and in larger organizational efforts with respect to cartels
and criminal organizations all over the country.
So, these are tools that we continue to use. We continue to work
with the U.S. Attorneys community in appropriate cases to get ap-
propriate punishments in those matters. There are new statutes.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 198 of 236

38
Again, as I said, what I explain to everybody and what we ex-
plain to judges is that firearms trafficking is not a victimless crime.
We don't see the victim in front of us, but so often the firearms,
60 percent of those trafficked firearms are going to felons and pro-
hibited people. They are using to hurt innocent, law-abiding Ameri-
cans.
That is what we have to do to implement, we have to make peo-
ple understand that the distributors are also responsible if they are .
breaking the law.
Ms. JAYAPAL. Just quickly, many of the guns recovered from
crime scenes South of the border are bought legally in the United
States. How can we stop that from happening, and what resources
do you need from Congress?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Well, when a firearm is purchased legally in
the United States and it crosses the border, that is a little bit dif-
ferent, right. That is a situation where those whose full-time job it
is to police the border are probably the lead. At the ATF, what we
do is try to focus on illegal activity, the black market in firearms.
Now, it is a little bit ambiguous, Congresswoman, because of
course something can look like a legal sale, but it is really a straw
purchaser.
Ms. JAYAPAL. Right.
Mr. DETTELBACH. This why when somebody walks into a store
who doesn't even know really what to ask for, plunks down $12,552
in cash and they are 20 miles from the border, and there is some-
body waiting outside in the parking lot for them that dropped them
off, that we depend on so many firearms dealers to figure out a
way to pick up the phone and help us. They do quite often.
Then what happens is the cartels look for the one that won't do
that, right. So, we have to get the word out to a minority of deal-
ers, the majority are trying to do the right thing. The minority of
dealers, because the enemy, the cartels, are seeking them out to try
to find weak links.
Ms. JAYAPAL. Thank you. I yield back, Mr. Chair.
Chair JORDAN. The gentlelady yields back. The gentleman from
California is recognized for five minutes.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Mr. Dettelbach, I am just curious, have you
expressed remorse to Mr. Malinowski's widow and family?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I am sorry?
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Have you expressed remorse to Mr. Malinow-
ski's widow-
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I will now, and I have before this morning, yes.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. What have you said to them?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Well, I said it here in open forum, but what
I said was of course-
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. What have you said to them personally? Have
you talked to them personally?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I am sorry?
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Have you talked to them personally, have you
expressed your sympathy to them personally?
Mr. IVEY. Would the gentleman yield?
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Do you just make public statements and issue
press releases?
Mr. IVEY. Would the gentleman yield?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 199 of 236

39
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. No. Answer the question, please.
Mr. DETTELBACH. Yes.
Mr. lvEY. He just did it.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. All right, thank you. Did you know about this
raid in advance?
Mr. DETTELBACH. We do 11,000 operations a year, and I be-
lieve-
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Did you know about this one?
Mr. DETTELBACH. That-and it would be-
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Did you know about this one, Mr. Dettelbach,
yes or no?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I believe the first when I heard about this mat-
ter was after the fact.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Who have you disciplined, what have you
done?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Sorry? What have we done-
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. What have you done in response to this?
Mr. DETTELBACH. We went together with the Little Rock Police,
who were also present, we went, and we requested an outside agen-
cy to do an independent investigation. We fully cooperated with
that investigation. That investigation, my understanding is the file
has now been turned over.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. I think this Committee is going to want to look
into this matter in much greater detail. I need to press on.
Let me just ask you a general question: What do you think is the
purpose of the Second Amendment?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Like all the amendments, the purpose of the
Second Amendment is to protect fundamental rights of Americans.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. You believe that a fundamental right of Amer-
ica includes the right to bear arms?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I believe that all the rights in the Bill of
Rights are important and fundamental rights, including the Second
Amendment.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Right. In the second half of 2021, only 34 in-
spections lead to a firearms dealer having their license revoked.
However, the number of qualifying violations dramatically in-
creased to 252 in 2022, and jumped again to 407 in 2023.
Now, either there has been an exponential increase in crooked
firearms dealers since Eiden took over, or there has been an expo-
nential increase in zealotry by your agency. I assume you would
say it is the latter.
Mr. DETTELBACH. The laws that Congress has passed and have
been in effect say that willful violators of the Gun Control Act are
subject to, they may have their licenses revoked.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. We have seen an exponential increase, I mean
just off the charts, since you took office. That seems to coincide
with a dramatic reduction in people willing to legally expose them-
selves to predawn raids on their homes. The number of voluntary
business closures post-inspection has risen sharply, from 24 in
2021, to 69 in 2022, and to 80 in 2023.
Now, this tells me that this is a deliberate policy to drive fire-
arms dealers out of the business, not only with a reign of legal ter-
ror, but in the case of Mr. Malinowski, the actual reign of physical
terror as well.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 200 of 236

40
Now, I know you are not going to agree with that, but can you
at least see how that appears to others?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Respectfully, I disagree. The enhanced enforce-
ment policy, which is publicly available, the terms of it, State very
clearly that we are not talking about paperwork violations. We are
talking about willful violations that impact on public safety, like re-
fusing to run a background check, selling to a felon, not respond-
ing-
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. That is not-what we are seeing-
Mr. DETTELBACH. Sorry.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Is an exponential increase in actions against
dealers, followed by an exponential increase in dealers just saying
this isn't worth the legal exposure, I am out of here. What is in-
volved in getting a Federal firearms license?
Mr. DETTELBACH. There is a process to get a license, right. You
fill out an application. You pay a $200 fee. There is a compliance
inspection, or not a compliance inspection, an application inspec-
tion that goes on.
Like, just like inspections in the process, for a revocation for a
compliance matter, there is ample due process. There are hearings
that go on-
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. OK, no, I understand-
Mr. DETTELBACH. In our own hearings-sorry.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. It is a fairly lengthy process. Now, your agen-
cy's rule says, "that even a single transaction or offer to engage in
a transaction"-or offer to engage in a transaction-"with combined
with other evidence may be sufficient to require a license as a
FFL." What does that mean?
Mr. DETTELBACH. That is, that is one sentence out of a 16-page
rule.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Well, what does that say?
Mr. DETTELBACH. The rule says-this is a matter before the
courts. Our positions on all these things are, and pages and pages
of briefs that it would take far too long and I know you have time
limits. I refer to those briefs. That is not a secret.
What I would say to you is it says in black and white, things
that might lead to a determination under the totality of cir-
cumstances that somebody is engaged in the business, and things
that don't.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. So, if somebody admires my gun collection and
I say you want to buy it, would that require an FFL?
Mr. DETTELBACH. There is a specific provision that Congress has
passed that says that people who are bona fide collectors can liq-
uidate their collections without becoming a licensee.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. That is not what this rule-
Mr. DETTELBACH. Of course, you would have-and I think that
is what you described. You would have to look at, obviously, the
whole-
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. That is not what your new rule says.
Mr. DETTELBACH. Respectfully, I disagree. It says in black and
white that this is allowed.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back.
Director, you have been at it, we have been at it an hour and
45 minutes. It is just, recognize that if you need a break, just let
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 201 of 236

41
us know and we will be happy to take a break. If not, if you are
willing, we will keep going.
Before I recognize the gentleman from California, you were get-
ting ready to say you had an outside investigation and you turned
it over to, and you didn't say who that it has been turned over to.
Mr. DETTELBACH. Oh, they, I believe they publicly announced,
the Arkansas State Police, that they turned over their investigative
file to the 6th District Prosecutor's Office. It is Pulaski County, Ar-
kansas, the State prosecutors.
I believe this is all public. I haven't had contact with them be-
cause I want to make sure that it is independent, right?
Chair JORDAN. Yes.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I believe that they are reviewing it.
Chair JORDAN. OK.
Mr. DETTELBACH. That part, I think we know they are reviewing
it.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman from California is recognized.
Mr. SWALWELL. Director, welcome. I want to thank you and the
brave men and women in law enforcement who serve your agency
every day. I have got some questions for you in a moment.
There is something that is imminent and I am concerned about,
because it just put a target on the back of everybody in law en-
forcement at the Federal level and the local level. That is a state-
ment that one of our colleagues made earlier this week.
We have jurisdiction over the FBI, as well as the ATF. Marjorie
Taylor Greene of Georgia said, "The Biden DOJ and FBI were plan-
ning to assassinate Pres Trump and gave the green light." Does ev-
eryone get it yet? What are Republicans going to do about it?
This is quite a concerning statement from an elected Member of
Congress, because this false statement creates the pretext for vio-
lence.
It suggests to Americans, who by the way are armed to the teeth,
we are the country where the most dangerous people have access
to the most dangerous weapons, and it suggests to them that their
own government and the people who wear the badge are out to as-
sassinate the former President.
I just want to first clear up this falsity. The FBI this week has
issued a statement to do that.
First and foremost, the search at Mar-a-Lago, the former Presi-
dent was not there. That was intentional. So, if there was an effort
to assassinate the former President, they went at a time when he
was not there.
Second, the former President was actually treated better than
most people during a raid because the FBI didn't go in with their
raid jackets, they wore polo shirts to show a little bit of respect for
the former President and not make it a raid-like environment.
Third, standard use-of-force procedures were followed during that
search, as they were followed in every search.
Fourth, the same search procedures and use-of-force policy that
was used to retrieve documents at President Biden's Delaware resi-
dence.
This is a pretext for violence. I will yield to any of my colleagues
who will join me in condemning it. I will yield to any colleague who
will condemn the suggestion by Marjorie Taylor Greene that the
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 202 of 236

42
FBI was out to assassinate former President Trump. Please, con-
demn it. Because if you don't, you are encouraging it.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Of course-
Mr. SWALWELL. You are consigning it. Mr. McClintock, please.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Of course we do. What a ridiculous question.
Mr. SWALWELL. What a ridiculous statement that she made.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. I agree with you.
Mr. SWALWELL. Thank you.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. I don't think there is anyone here who agrees
with it.
Mr. SWALWELL. Thank you.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. Both sides have a lunatic fringe in their move-
ment, ours and yours. Frankly, I find yours far more frightening
because-
Mr. SWALWELL. I have never heard somebody suggest that we
were trying to-that the FBI was trying to assassinate a former
President. I do appreciate, Mr. McClintock, that you will be con-
demning it. I would welcome anyone else who would condemn that.
We will make this clear when the Attorney General testifies.
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. I would also, however, condemn the instruc-
tions-
Mr. SWALWELL. Reclaiming my time-reclaiming my time-
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. In such an operation-
Mr. SWALWELL. Reclaiming my time-
Mr. MCCLINTOCK. On conducting such an operation at all.
Mr. SWALWELL. Director-reclaiming my time. Director, the
former President stated last week at an NRA convention that every
single Biden attack on gun owners and manufacturers will be ter-
minated on my first week in office, perhaps my first day.
I have a seven-year-old, a five-year-old, and a two-year-old. What
does this mean for parents in America as it relates to whether our
kids are going to be sheltering in place and hiding under their
desks for the rest of their time at ~chool, if this was to happen?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Congressman, I can't and won't get involved in
electoral politics. What I said in my opening statement, though, I
think hopefully people from all sides of questions can agree on,
which is we see progress being made. We see violent crime going
down.
We have a strategy that appears to be working. My hope is that
we can all come together, and maybe there are policy disagree-
ments on different things. We can all come together, though, on the
fact that we are driving down violent crime all over this country
and double down on the strategies that are working.
That is my hope. The things that are working, let's stick with.
Because the numbers show that real lives are being saved.
Mr. SWALWELL. Thank you. I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman from
Wisconsin is recognized.
Mr. TIFFANY. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Is violent crime going down?
Mr. DETIELBACH. Excuse me?
Mr. TIFFANY. Is violent crime going down?
Mr. DETTELBACH. According to the data I have seen, violent
crime is going down, yes.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 203 of 236

43
Mr. TIFFANY. That is not what Director Wray told us a number
of months ago when he was here before us.
Mr. DETTELBACH. What I have seen in recent numbers, violent
crime is going down. There is in the 175 cities covered by the major
city chiefs, there are double-digit reductions in violent crime. I was
in Baltimore at the turn of the year, a 19 percent reduction in
homicides, LA down 13 percent.
Mr. TIFFANY. So, when we had a hearing up in New York City
just, what is that, about a year ago, we heard from city counselors
and others that they said that the police are not charging crime
now because a district attorney would not prosecute that crime.
Here, let me give you an example from a city in our State. Here
was a statement from the District Attorney in Milwaukee County.
This is a number of years ago, but he still continues to be the Dis-
trict Attorney.
Is there going to be an individual I divert or I put into a treatment program
who is going to go out and kill somebody? You bet.
This the same guy who let off the Waukesha Christmas killer,
who drove a vehicle through, killing six people just a couple years
ago in a Christmas parade up in Wisconsin.
Are you sure violent crime is going down?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I believe the numbers bear out that violent
crime is going down. I think last year saw the most precipitous
drop in violent crime-
Mr. TIFFANY. You cited Minneapolis here in your testimony,
whether it is indicting 45 Minneapolis gang members involved in
murder and drug trafficking. We just had a-they have a district
attorney in Minneapolis also that does not prosecute crime.
She will go after the cops, as she is doing right now with a cop
who was doing his job and she is going after him now. Are you sure
those indicted 45 Minneapolis gang members are actually going to
be charged with a crime? Are you sure of that?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I was there to announce the indictment myself,
along with the U.S. Attorney, along with the Chief of Police, along
with the Sheriff. They are already indicted, and I hope they go to
jail for a long time.
Mr. TIFFANY. I think you said that there is more activity with
the cartels. You said, you commented about this Sinaloa Cartel. Is
there more activity going on down by the Southern border as-
Mr. DETTELBACH. What we see is the flow of firearms. Our job
is, right, to stop firearms trafficking, which goes from the United
States to Mexico. We have seen an increase in our number of sei-
zures.
Now, that increase could be due to the fact that we are spending
a lot of time and resources trying to stop that. Yes, we see a con-
tinuing problem.
Mr. TIFFANY. Yes. Director Wray would echo that a number of
months ago, or I should say you are echoing what he said. He said,
"we are seeing a significant increase going on related to the South-
ern border." So, you would basically agree with his comment, his
general comment, in regard to that?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Yes, with Southbound traffic, it is a continuing
threat.
Mr. TIFFANY. You think the open border contributes to this?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 204 of 236

44
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. So, I am not in charge of the agency that con-
trols the border. With respect to Southbound traffic, that is things
going-
Mr. TIFFANY. So, have you shared that with the Attorney Gen-
eral?
Mr. DETIELBACH. Well, I think everybody under-go ahead, I am
sorry.
Mr. TIFFANY. Have you shared it with the Department of Home-
land Security?
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. We work together on all these task forces with
the Department of Homeland Security, these Southbound task
forces. They have agents and officers sitting with us, doing that
interdiction for Southbound firearms trafficking.
Mr. TIFFANY. So, they know this problem is getting worse.
Mr. DETIELBACH. Well, they are-part of the fact of why the sei-
zures are up, that we are interdicting more weapons than ever,
double-digit increases last year in terms of Southbound seizures.
Mr. TIFFANY. So, Mr. Chair, besides human trafficking, besides
the terrorists that are coming across the border, we see another ex-
ample here where the open Southern border is making it poten-
tially more deadly for Americans.
We see these guns that are continuing to flow both ways across
the border. Plus, you have a border patrol that can no longer do
their job as babysitters.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. It is very rare-I am sorry.
Mr. TIFFANY. I am going to close up here.
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. Sure.
Mr. TIFFANY. If you have a-what would be your recommenda-
tion if somebody lied on their 44 73 form, they dumped their pistol
in a garbage can and it was in a school zone, what would be your
recommendation for charging that person?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I think that echoes the fact of a publicly re-
ported case, so I am not going to comment on a pending matter.
I think that question is aimed at that.
Mr. TIFFANY. So, it is an example of somebody that did some-
thing like that, and I am .sure it has happened before. What would
you recommend they be charged with?
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. If a person out there intentionally lies on a
4473 form-
Mr. TIFFANY. Yup.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. They can be charged with the crime of lying on
a 4473 form.
Mr. TIFFANY. Dumped a pistol in a garbage can. So, those are the
facts of the case.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Again, I am not going to comment on specific
facts. If somebody lies on a 4473, that was part of the charges in
the case that we discussed earlier that was a subject of so much
discussion. That is public.
Not commenting on the specifics, that is a crime.
Mr. TIFFANY. Mr. Chair, I am going to close real quickly. A dual
system of justice in America. Hunter Biden vs. the Bryan Mali-
nowski. I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back. The gentleman from
Colorado is recognized.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 205 of 236

45
Ms. BALINT. Mr. Chair?
Chair JORDAN. I am sorry, the gentlelady from Vermont has
unanimous consent?
Ms. BALINT. Yes. I ask unanimous consent to enter into the
record "Milwaukee Sees Decline in Homicides in 2023." This is
WPR.
Chair JORDAN. Without objection. The gentleman from Colorado
is recognized for five minutes.
Mr. NEGUSE. I thank the Chair. I also want to thank the gentle-
woman from Vermont for providing this Committee and obviously
those who are watching it with some sense of a real semblance of
the actual facts on the ground with respect to the comments made
by my colleague from Wisconsin.
Director, I first want to say thank you for your service to our
country. You have spent your career in law enforcement, obviously
a former Federal prosecutor. I am grateful for the work that you
and your agency does each and every day to keep communities
across my district in Colorado, Rocky Mountain West, and the en-
tire country safe.
You have more patience than I. I think it is awfully rich, and I
am not asking you to opine on this or to respond, but it is awfully
rich for some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle to lec-
ture you, who have spent your career in law enforcement leading
one of the premier domestic law enforcement agencies now. To lec-
ture you about crime and gun trafficking, when they have worked
vociferously over the last 17 months to defund the very agency that
you lead that is charged with addressing gun trafficking. With its-
charged with keeping us safe. I think it is shameful.
How much did President Biden's Fiscal Year 2024 budget request
identify for the ATF? What was the total sum?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I believe that the number that I am very famil-
iar with is the amount of the cut, which was $4 7 .5 million, which
was the real salary and expenses cut, which is causing us not to
hire agents, which is causing us not to be able to be out there with
our State and local partners arresting carjackers and violent crimi-
nals.
The request is three or four steps, it was a significant increase
for the ATF funding. Not only was the increase not granted, but
the ATF's budget was cut, and that is having these kinds of effects
on our ability to fight violent crime that I am talking about.
Mr. NEGUSE. Well, you beat me to it, and thank .you, Mr. Direc-
tor, because I think you have provided the requisite clarity. Forty-
seven-million-dollar cut. Three billion dollars less than what the
President ultimately requested, $1.9 billion was the President's re-
quest in terms of funding for the ATF. Ultimately it was about $1.6
billion, which meant in real dollars a $4 7 million cut.
Mr. DETTELBACH. Went from 1.675 to about 1.625.
Mr. NEGUSE. Correct.
Mr. DETTELBACH. By the way, that happened halfway through
the year because Congress hadn't passed the budget. So, we had to
effectuate the entire $4 7 million cut in six months.
Which was also, if Congress delays in passing these measures, I
understand they are difficult. They are, for people running organi-
zations, and many of you have run businesses, that is very, very
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 206 of 236

46
difficult to effectuate a whole cut after somebody is giving you the
higher budget for half the year and says he would make it all up
in a half year.
Mr. NEGUSE. Well, I would like to hear any of my colleagues de-
fend the propriety of pursuing that kind of cut to one of our Na-
tion's lead law enforcement agencies. The cognitive dissonance is
astounding to me.
I have listened for years to my colleagues on the other side claim
that folks in our party don't support law enforcement, which of
course couldn't be further from the truth. Yet, simultaneously they
now pursue significant a cut to the operations of the ATF.
I am grateful, by the way, Director, this is outside of your baili-
wick, so to speak, but they just released a budget a month ago that
proposes severe cuts to local law enforcement as well, rural sher-
iffs, rural police departments in my district. COPS grant program,
which I am sure you are familiar with, given your time as a pros-
ecutor years ago. A program that is integral to enabling local law
enforcement to do their jobs, to hire more officers. I think it is
shameful.
I am grateful for what, as I said, you are doing, and I wish I had
more time to be able to spend or perhaps engage in a colloquy here
around some of the regulations that the ATF has promulgated,
which I support, to address some of the mass violence, mass shoot-
ings that we have tragically had in communities across the coun-
try, including in my community in Boulder, Colorado.
I would just say that the sum of my remarks is that I am grate-
ful for the work that you do. I am grateful for the work that the
law enforcement officers in your agency do each and every day. You
certainly will have our support. I would hope that it would be on
a bipartisan basis. Hope springs eternal. We will keep working to-
ward that.
I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back.
What is your budget this year?
Mr. DETTELBACH. The budget, I believe, is $1.625 billion, was the
most recent budget that was passed.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman from Kentucky is recogriized.
Mr. MAssIE. I thank the Chair.
Now, I am troubled here by your new rule defining what a fire-
arms dealer is, or engaged in the business of selling firearms. Isn't
the purpose of it or won't the result be that more people will be
defined as being engaged in the business of selling firearms?
Mr. DETTELBACH. The purpose of the rules is to effectuate Con-
gress' definition. Congress expanded the definition two years ago in
the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. So, and-
Mr. MAsSIE. What is the result going to be?
Mr. DETTELBACH. The result is going to be, I hope, increased
compliance with Congress' statute.
Mr. MAssIE. The result is going to be subjecting more American
citizens to the treatment that Mr. Malinowski, unfortunately, re-
ceived from our Federal Government, which is you want to get
more warrants to serve these no-knock regs on people who have not
been convicted of anything, yet may be convicted on their doorstep
today.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 207 of 236

47
I want to address something in your rule here. I did find one
thing that I think is sort of helpful. I hope the other side of the
aisle will read this. I want to give you time to look at this. I want
to give you time to look at this.
The Department, that would be the ATF, correct, in your rule?
Mr. DETIELBACH. I don't know what you are-is this from the-
Mr. MAsSIE. Yes. This is from the rule.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. The Department refers to the Department of
Justice.
Mr. MASSIE. OK.
The Department also notes that the term "gun show loophole" is a mis-
nomer and that there is no statutory exemption under the Gun Control Act
for unlicensed persons to engage in the business of dealing in firearms at
a gun show, or at any other venue.
I hope the other side of the aisle, this is the one useful thing that
I found in a 16-page rule and hundreds of pages of explanation is
to show people that there is no gun show loophole.
Do you agree with the Department and with your own rule here?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I agree that Congress never said, and has
never said, and hasn't said now, didn't say before this, "that some-
body who is engaged in the business"-those are the words there-
"can do that without a license depending on where they sit."
People have encouraged the perception, and we have seen an in-
creased level of noncompliance among people who are either inten-
tionally or otherwise breaking Congress' statute.
Mr. MAssIE. The only people encouraging this perception are the
left side of the aisle and the media. There is no gun show loophole.
I am glad you finally admitted that.
Now, I want to get to something else.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I have said that publicly. There never was.
Mr. MASSIE. OK. Thank you. I want to get to something else in
your opening statement. Maybe you would want to read it back be-
cause it is written down.
Can you tell me the fact that you were expressing or claimed
that there are more-that firearms are the leading cause of death
for children? What were your specific words in your testimony?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I would have to look at my testimony. It is
children and youth.
Mr. MAsSIE. Can you look at it?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. It is in my longer statement that is in the
record.
Mr. MAsSIE. OK.
Mr. DETIELBACH. Obviously, I am summarizing the statement,
as the Chair asked me to do. So, it is in my longer statement which
has been entered into the record. I don't have it in front of me.
Mr. MASSIE. Can you define a child and youth?
Mr. DETIELBACH. Child and youth, there is a statistical study
that is the source of that. We can get that to you. I don't know the
specific cite sitting here. We will be glad to get that to you.
Mr. MAsSIE. Yes. The statistical study according to news reports
and Snopes, as Mr. Nehls referred to, excludes infants under the
age of one and includes 18- and 19-year-olds.
Is that true?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I don't know. Honestly-
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 208 of 236

48
Mr. MAsSIE. You don't know your own statistics?
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. No, I don't know. Honestly-
Mr. MAsSIE. Why was that in your testimony to Congress?
Mr. DETl'ELBACH. -any killing of children is unacceptable.
Mr. MAsSIE. Any killing of any person is unacceptable except in
self-defense. Are you including if a 17-, 18-, or 19-year-old gang
member came to a person's door and tried to attack them that this
was self-defense? Are you including that in your statistics?
Mr. DETl'ELBACH. Congressman, firearms violence is a huge
ender of lives of children.
Mr. MASSIE. Yes, yes. No, I am going-I am not going to let you
make your public service statement. I want you to defend your
sworn testimony. Are you claiming that 18- and 19-year-olds are
children in your statistics?
Mr. DETl'ELBACH. Again, you have my statement, Congressman.
Mr. MAsSIE. Yes, I have it. I am asking you to explain it.
Here is my other question. How many 18-year-olds who have
committed a gun crime have you suggested to be prosecuted as a
minor?
Mr. DETl'ELBACH. We are a law enforcement agency. We are not
the prosecutors.
Mr. MAsSIE. OK.
Mr. DETl'ELBACH. In the Federal system-
Mr. MASSIE. How many have you gone after, OK, 18-year-olds?
Mr. DETl'ELBACH. Respectfully, we investigate crimes shoulder-
to-shoulder with both the law enforcement-
Mr. MAsSIE. OK. Are 18-year-olds children or are they adults?
Mr. DETl'ELBACH. Each State has its, own under the gun laws as
to when juveniles are prosecuted, Federal gun laws.
Mr. MASSIE. Rules. Federal laws.
Mr. DETl'ELBACH. As you may know, Federal laws with respect
to the prosecution of juveniles are exceedingly difficult. You are
correct that prosecution of juveniles, if you are applying this as
adults, is rare in the Federal system.
Mr. MAsSIE. Here is the reality.
Mr. DETl'ELBACH. Juvenile crime-
Mr. MASSIE. Reclaiming my time.
Mr. DETl'ELBACH. Juvenile crime is an increasing problem.
Chair JORDAN. The time belongs to the gentleman from Cali-
fornia.
Mr. MASSIE. Reclaiming my time, look, you are including in your
statistics, whether you know it or not, 18- and 19-year-olds. You
would never claim that those are minors in the context of gun pros-
ecutions.
The only way you can get the number of deaths attributable to
firearms above other causes is by excluding under the age of one,
and including 18- and 19-year-olds, particularly gang members,
and including self-defense.
So, with that, I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back.
The gentlelady from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Ms. DEAN. I thank you, Mr. Chair.
Director Dettelbach, thank you for being here. Thank you, and
I believe about 5,000 of your members, full-time employees of the
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 209 of 236

49
ATF. Just to put that number into some perspective. There are
more than 6,500 sworn police officers serving just the city of Phila-
delphia, my home city. Would it be fair to call the ATF a relatively
small but mighty law enforcement agency, Director?
Mr. DETTELBACH. The people, those 5,000-plus people who work
at the ATF are incredible people. They are doing a mammoth job
with very few resources. It is a dangerous job. Every single day it
is a dangerous job for them out there because of the types of cases
that we often see. They are doing a great job at it.
Ms. DEAN. I agree with you. As you note in your testimony, the
ATF is, in fact, the only Federal law enforcement agency with the
sole focus of working with police and partners in State and local
law enforcement to protect Americans from violent crime. Correct?
Mr. DETTELBACH. We are the Federal agency with the sole focus
on violent crime.
Ms. DEAN. I want to say to those of you in the room or who are
watching on TV, if you are experiencing whiplash, I am sure it is
not lost on anyone in this room, anyone who cares about the issues
around the police and law enforcement.
We are just one week removed from National Police Week. I sat
over on the regal Senate side as we honored the fallen police offi-
cers. It is whiplash in this hearing. One week we honor fallen po-
lice officers, the next we want to defund law enforcement like you.
From rooting out cartels fueling the fentanyl crisis to curbing
gun violence, the number one killer of American children: Gun vio-
lence. That is what people on the other side of the aisle ought to
be outraged about. The number one killer of our children in this
country: Gun violence. Progress has been made even though our
Republican colleagues attempt to discredit and defund you.
I want to turn to the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. I am so
proud that we were finally able to do something, some small things
a.round gun violence.
We are weeks away from the second anniversary of this great
act: June 25th. I was heartened to see that last month the ATF fi-
nalized a rule implementing the landmark legislation.
Part of the rule overlaps with my bill, the Fire Sale Loophole
Closing Act, which would prevent FFLs who have had their li-
censes revoked or denied from selling old business inventory guns
without background checks.
Some Republican lawmakers have raised concern that the final
rule goes too far.
Could you tell us, why is this rule necessary? Why do we need
to know what happens to those inventoried guns?
Mr. DETTELBACH. So, again, of course as you know, the rule is
under litigation. So, I am limited to the public record and what I
can say.
The text of the rule speaks for itself and should be looked at,
and, also, the explanation, the hundreds of pages of explanation
and the response to comments.
With respect to that one part of the law that Congress passed as
part of the Gun Control Act, if a dealer who is a licensed firearms
dealer loses their license, right, the notion that this somehow, for
the person who loses their license can then not follow the Gun Con-
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 210 of 236

50
trol Act, right, is inconsistent with the structure of the Gun Control
Act in many cases.
Ms. DEAN. Inconceivable.
Mr. DETTELBACH. So, that is the idea that everybody is playing
by the same set of rules.
There are so many dealers and collectors who are following the
law out there. Part of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act and
part of our enforcement is to make sure that those who obey the
law aren't being treated at a competitive disadvantage to people
who are out there ignoring the law. Right? It is only fair.
There are so many people who are obeying the Gun Control Act,
who are obeying the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act. Those who
are out there ignoring it, just from a plain old business perspective
we have to have a fair marketplace where everybody obeys Con-
gress' statutes.
Ms. DEAN. I couldn't agree more. It is also common sense that
if you lost your license you can't just get rid of your inventory with-
out following the law.
Mr. DETTELBACH. Including background checks.
Ms. DEAN. Exactly. What challenges have you had, how had the
ATF faced implementing the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act?
Litigation is clearly part of it, but what else?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I think when Congress gave us our new tools,
which we are very grateful for, Congress didn't appropriate extra
moneys for us to enforce those particular new tools.
We did get a million dollars a year to work with the National
Shooting Sports Foundation on the "Don't Lie for the Other Guy"
campaign, which is an important collaborative effort we have with
the industry. The 500 cases, defendants that we charged under the
new statutes with our prosecutors and our partners, right, that is
taking away from other priorities that we also still want to service.
So, again, when we at the ATF are choosing what to do, Con-
gresswoman, we are choosing between very important things. We
are choosing between body-worn cameras and cartels. We are
choosing between gangs and carjackers. Those are very important
things that we are trying to balance.
Ms. DEAN. I couldn't agree more. I honor all your agents.
I have a unanimous request, consent request, Mr. Chair.
Chair JORDAN. OK.
Ms. DEAN. (1) You spoke about the fallen ATF officers. What I
would like to enter into the record is a listing, multiple page listing
of the fallen ATF officers, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms,
and Explosives fallen agents over the years.
(2) I also have a unanimous consent request to enter this article
from March of this year, ABC News, "U.S. stats show violent crime
dramatically falling."
(3) I would like to also enter into the record an article around
a child in Philadelphia just last month, a three-year-old child sadly
picked up a firearm and died from a shot.
Chair JORDAN. Without objection.
Ms. DEAN. Thank you.
Chair JORDAN. The gentlelady yields back.
The gentleman from Texas is recognized.
Mr. ROY. I thank the Chair.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 211 of 236

51
I thank the Director because the Director knows I was a pros-
ecutor under project Safe Neighborhoods in the U.S. Attorney's Of-
fice, worked closely with the ATF in the Dallas-Ft. Worth metro
area.
I share your sentiment about the patriotic Americans serving the
ATF trying to stop violent criminals from moving drugs and using
firearms against the law in ways that are undermining safety and
security of the American people. I want to thank those men and
women for what they do every day in that service.
Would the Director agree that there have been times where the
ATF have not gotten it right? I realize that with respect to the case
we have already discussed with respect to Mr. Malinowski that you
say is an investigation. What about something like Fast and Furi-
ous?
Mr. DETIELBACH. Of course, like any agency, there are times
where we don't get things right and can improve.
Mr. ROY. So, a couple of questions for you along these lines. I
think it is really important for the American people to understand.
Do you, as the Director of the ATF, do you believe that the Amer-
ican people have a constitutional right, an individual right to keep
and bear arms?
Mr. DETIELBACH. The Supreme Court has made it clear and I,
yes, the American-the Second Amendment has been interpreted
numerous times by the Supreme Court just as-there is more to it
but yes. What you have said, yes.
Mr. ROY. OK. Director, you do believe that you interpret the Con-
stitution that way?
Mr. DETIELBACH. I interpret all the laws the way that the Su-
preme Court says they are to be interpreted. When the Supreme
Court speaks on something-
Mr. ROY. Would you have said that about Plessy?
Mr. DETIELBACH. Congressman, I work for a law enforcement
agency. I am not a judge.
Mr. ROY. I know. I am just asking you-
Mr. DETTELBACH. I accept the rulings of the Court, including
that one. I am not dodging your question.
Mr. ROY. You, as the Director of the ATF, believe there is an in-
dividual constitutional right to bear arms?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Yes. There is one. The Supreme Court has said
it.
Mr. ROY. Along, and so, along those lines do you, as the Director
of the ATF believe that the Federal Government should maintain
a registry or otherwise track, catalog, keep records of the trans-
actions of firearms conducted by the American people such that you
would know what firearms I possess?
Mr. DETIELBACH. Congress has explicitly forbidden the ATF from
keeping a registry. We do not.
Again, we obey the law. I don't make the law, we obey it.
Mr. ROY. Do you, as the Director, believe that the Federal Gov-
ernment should track ownership of firearms among the American
people?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Congressman, we follow the law as you put it,
as you pass it. You have said we cannot have a registry. We follow
that provision and will continue to as long as it is the law.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 212 of 236

52
Mr. ROY. As the Director of the ATF do you have a position on
that? Should we track ownership of firearms?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I, as Director of the ATF, my position is if it
is in the law, we follow it.
Mr. ROY. If I want to sell a gun that I currently own to a friend
in Texas, do I need a license?
Mr. DETTELBACH. So, getting into the specifics of the rule, which
is in litigation, so first,
Mr. ROY. This ought to be a really simple question.
Mr. DETTELBACH. I understand.
Well, so you look at the totality of the circumstances. If we are
talking about an isolated sale from somebody who is not engaged
in the business of dealing firearms, you don't need a license.
Mr. ROY. OK. All right. If I, a citizen of this country and I live
in Texas, I have a weapon and I want to sell it to a fellow Texan
on an isolated basis, do I need a license?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Again, if you are not engaged in the business
of selling firearms, those are Congress' words-
Mr. ROY. If I, if I closed a sale for a firearm last year, OK, and
I do that on some relevant website like texasguntrader.com, and I
sell that weapon. I sell it for $500.
Then, I inherit a gun from my dad or from my uncle. I inherited
it last month. It is, like, six months later. I sell it. I am selling it
for another profit, I sell it for $500.
Then, less than a year later I have another weapon that I inherit
or I have got, and I decide I don't need it anymore, and I sell it.
Is that engaging in the business? Is that engaging in activity that
means I need a license?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I think pursuant to the clear language of Con-
gress in doing this, and to the things we have said in the rule, we
have specifically mentioned inheritance as one of the things that is
not indicative of engaging in the business.
Mr. ROY. What if I have just 12; I have 12, 15, or 20 weapons
and I sell three over the course off a year?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Congressman, each-I am sorry. I am sorry, I
didn't mean to interrupt.
Mr. ROY. No, I am just saying. If I have, I have about 15, let's
assume I had 15 or 20 weapons and I wanted to sell three over the
course of a year?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I think what I,-
Mr. ROY. I would like to make money from them.
Mr. DETTELBACH. -to what you are saying is that you look at
the-it is very clear that you look at the totality of the cir-
cumstances. We can go through an endless series of hypotheticals.
Hypotheticals aren't the way we address cases.
Mr. ROY. You understand-and I realize I am over my time-do
you understand why the average citizen is sitting out there saying
I have got 400 pages of rulemaking, might not understand what
they are allowed to do under the law when the Director of the ATF
can't look at a Member of Congress and tell me yes or no emphati-
cally whether if I sell a weapon, or two weapons, or three weapons,
or five, whether or not I need a license?
Do you think that is the way the law ought to be, the rules?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 213 of 236

53
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. Respectfully, I believe that the rule that we
have promulgated provides way more information and clarity than
just the one or two sentences that Congress provided. We were see-
ing massive noncompliance.
Mr. ROY. In 400 pages? You can't even answer it. How can the
average American know it?
Chair JORDAN. The time of the gentleman has expired.
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. We are in the business of knowing. We have
looked at the whole case.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back. The gentlelady from-
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. We would determine based on it-I am sorry,
Mr. Chair.
Chair JORDAN. The gentlelady from North Carolina is recognized
for five minutes.
Ms. Ross. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Thank you, Director Dettelbach for being here the second time in
over a year, and for your commitment to keeping our communities
safe.
As requested by the Department of Justice, the ATF recently re-
ported that over a five-year period from 2017-2021, 68,000 illegally
trafficked firearms were distributed across the United States by
unlicensed dealers.
The Iron Pipeline, which we discussed earlier, specifically refers
to guns smuggled up the 1-95 corridor from the Southern States to
the Mid-Atlantic and New England. It runs directly through my
home State of North Carolina, which is one of the top destinations
for gun traffickers.
Now, we wouldn't know this information, which directly impacts
public safety in my State, without the ATF's dedicated work to
make data available to the public and to all of our law enforcement
agencies. This data is a critical tool for local law enforcement to ad-
dress gun trafficking.
I also want to highlight the implementation of the Bipartisan
Safer Communities Act which, as we have heard, is one of the most
significant steps Congress has taken to reduce gun violence in dec-
ades, giving law enforcement and prosecutors new means to hold
gun traffickers accountable.
I also want to note that both of North Carolina's Republican Sen-
ators voted for the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act in the last
Congress.
Building off this legislation is imperative. It will take continued
bipartisan consensus to do so.
We have talked a little bit about the gun trafficking provisions
in the Safe Communities Act, but I want to broaden that a little
bit and ask you how gun trafficking intersects with drug traf-
ficking, particularly fentanyl trafficking, and what the ATF is
doing to reduce not just gun trafficking and gun violence, but the
menace of fentanyl and other dangerous drugs?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I have been involved with prosecution since
1991. One thing that has stayed the same and, unfortunately, I am
sure will stay the same, is that guns and drugs, illicit guns and
drugs go together. Gangs, cartels, and individual dealers, they are
armed often as a means of enforcing their business practices, their
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 214 of 236

54
unlawful criminal conduct, and punishing individuals who chal-
lenge them, intimidating witnesses, you name it.
So, these things go together.
With respect to fentanyl, that is also, as was true with crack, it
is true with powder cocaine, true with heroin, true with opioids,
and it is true with fentanyl. We work alone and together with our
partners on cases that involve narcotics trafficking all the time for
that reason. Armed drug trafficking organizations are part of what
the ATF does.
Just earlier this month the ATF made a case that resulted in
members of the Sinaloa Cartel going to jail for literally decades, I
think one for life. We are routinely seeing fentanyl dealers and or-
ganizations that are armed to the teeth and that are threatening
people's lives.
Ms. Ross. So, do you believe. that the more we support efforts to
stop gun trafficking, that will also help in our efforts to stop drug
trafficking?
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. I know it.
Ms. Ross. I am going to ask you a fun question since I know it
has been kind of a rough day.
If it was Christmas and you could be fully funded in the ways
that you have requested, what would be your top three priorities?
How would that make our communities safer?
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. Since it is Christmas, can I get an extra one
or two?
Mr. Ross. Absolutely. You have 36 seconds.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Well, we are the violent crime agency, so I
think what I would start with is we know a strategy that is work-
ing. The crime gun intelligence strategy working with State and
local law enforcement is working. We have to scale it, right?
So, we have 60 crime gun intelligence centers or so. We have put
out an extra ten in the last year. I would put our crime gun intel-
ligence centers I would try to stand them up in numerous other
places.
Second, would be, to support them we need better intel. Crime
gun intelligence is driven by a couple things: The National Inte-
grated Ballistic Information Network, or NIBIN; and crime gun
tracing.
I would start, I would continue and ramp up our campaign to get
sheriffs, to get chiefs, to get law enforcement officers all around the
country to fully participate in the NIBIN and tracing, three tools
that we provide them.
Gosh, it is so hard-and the third I would say I would double
and triple down on our RICONCAR gang strategy. It is a very ef-
fective legal tool that puts into effect the crime gun intelligence.
The Minneapolis case is a great example. So, they have 15-20
shootings all around town. They look totally unconnected. Through
the crime gun intelligence tools we provide, we are able to connect
them together and show that it is the Highs, that is the name of
the gang, one group that is responsible for all this. So, then we put
together a RICO case which has extra teeth to make sure we are
taking down the whole organization.
So, I think that would be my third.
Ms. Ross. Thank you for your service.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 215 of 236

55
I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. I think it is interesting, too, that the Director
didn't mention body cameras, even though he told us that they
weren't wearing those because of budget cuts. That didn't make his
Christmas list.
The time is now the gentleman from North Carolina.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I did ask for extra [inaudible].
Mr. BISHOP. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
In the Malinowski killing, did you say you are deferring to and
waiting for this investigation from the Arkansas State Police?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. The Arkansas State Police has referred the
matter to the District Attorney's Office. It is my understanding
from public-
Mr. BISHOP. You have been deferring until that to do, take any
action yourself; is that right?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. That would be our normal course of action if
there is a pending criminal investigation. To make sure that we
preserve the integrity of that investigation, we let it proceed, yes.
Mr. BISHOP. That is a criminal investigation only?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. They will decide the scope. My understanding
is they're investigating to see-
Mr. BISHOP. That is a criminal-that is a criminal-let's stay on
my question. That is a criminal investigation?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. It is an investigation to see whether Arkansas
law was violated, is my understanding.
Mr. BISHOP. That is called a criminal investigation, right? You
are a criminal law enforcement agency. Don't filibuster me. It's
straightforward.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I am not filibustering. You know that State
prosecutors have a variety of different-
Mr. BISHOP. All right, let me-stop. It is my time. The Arkansas
State Police, in their press release on April 24-22 said,
We do not have the authority to address methods and tactics used or
whether agency protocols and policies were followed.
Have you seen that?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I have seen the press release that-
Mr. BISHOP. You have seen that?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Correct.
Mr. BISHOP. So, you are deferring action on questions of methods
of tactics until you see what Arkansas does with the criminal in-
vestigation?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. That is the normal, standard thing that we do.
Because if you start interviewing witnesses, if you start talking to
people in the middle of a criminal investigation, very quickly people
start talking about the fact that the integrity of that investigation
it is very important to respect the ongoing investigation.
Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Dettelbach, in the Breonna Taylor-did you
watch yesterday's hearing by any chance?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I did not have a chance to watch all of yester-
day's hearing. I watched a little bit.
Mr. BISHOP. Did you watch some ofit?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I watched some of it.
Mr. BISHOP. Well, in the Louisville situation with Breonna Tay-
lor, the Metropolitan Police Department there fired its first officer
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 216 of 236

56
within 90 days of the incident. They were doing that as a matter
of their management responsibility.
By the way, the Justice Department, of which your agency is a
component, has conducted a pattern and practice investigation and
is pursuing enforcement action against the Louisville Police De-
partment.
What is your excuse for not taking managerial action about the
appropriateness of the tactics used in the Malinowski killing?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I think you would agree with me that police of-
ficers and agents are entitled to due process just like everybody
else.
Mr. BISHOP. There is no doubt about that. That doesn't answer
my question.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Well-
Mr. BISHOP. Don't you have management responsibility with re-
spect to the way the agency is conducting such matters?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. When we can, based on the review-and I
don't think-I don't expect it to be a lengthy period of time-we
would conduct abuse of force review, as we do in every matter like
this that occurs. We will do that in this case as we do in every mat-
ter.
Mr. BISHOP. Well, what is soon enough? They acted in Louisville
within three months. What is soon enough?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Respectfully, we will see that the investigation
will end, and then we will commence our internal review, as we al-
ways do.
Mr. BISHOP. Concerning bodycams, you testified that the rollout
within the ATF was incomplete.
Is it your testimony that the rollout has not extended to the ATF
personnel in Arkansas, and that is the reason they didn't have
bodycams?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. The field division that covers Arkansas has not
yet been implemented. That is correct.
Mr. BISHOP. What did you say the cost was of your, of your item
there, something in the tens of millions? Was it 40 million, 45 mil-
lion?
Mr. DETTELBACH. This isn't the downstream cost because there
are huge data costs, as you know, with this. The initial implemen-
tation the request in the budget is $37.5 million.
Mr. BISHOP. Putting bodycams in. So, I understand your budget
is-
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Thirty-seven million.
Mr. BISHOP. So, I understand your budget-
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Thirty-seven point eight.
Mr. BISHOP. Your budget is about 1.7 billion. So, if my calculator
is right, that is about 2.6 percent of your budget. You couldn't find
2.6 percent of your budget to catch up with common practice among
also resource-constrained city police departments all over the coun-
try?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Respectfully, our budget is not 1.7 billion, it is
1.625 billion.
Mr. BISHOP. Whatever.
Mr. DETTELBACH. The reason r know that is because that $45
million cut has resulted in not being able to hire agents.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 217 of 236

57
Mr. BISHOP. Yes, but you are talking about something else.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Also, cutting-
Mr. BISHOP. I am talking about bodycams that are in common
use among metropolitan police departments across this country.
You are saying something that involves two or three percent of
your budget prevented you from getting it done?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I am saying that we are in the process, as we
said from the beginning, of implementing the policy in phases.
Mr. BISHOP. Let me ask you just for the record-
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. We continue-
Mr. BISHOP. Mr. Director, let me ask you this question. I under-
stand there could be justifications for lots of things, about putting
tape on, jamming signals, things like that in a certain set of cir-
cumstances. What can possibly justify deferring, as that video
showed, deferring the execution of that search warrant until the
person who justifies the use of such tactics, if there is a question
of a risk of violence, was present in the home?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. These are career law enforcement agents and
police.
Mr. BISHOP. I didn't ask that. I asked you-
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. They make determinations-
Mr. BISHOP. I asked you what could possibly justify that?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. In my experience, when an agent decides,
when a cop decides to go through a door, when a cop decides to exe-
cute an operation, they are entitled, if they are correct, the warrant
allowed that warrant to be executed on the day it was executed.
We will see what the investigation says.
Congressman, armchair quarterbacking police officers who are
risking their lives without evidence yet is not the way to go here.
Mr. BISHOP. That is about 5,000 words, and not one justification
uttered, not one possible justification.
My time has expired.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back.
The gentleman from Maryland is recognized.
Mr. IVEY. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Welcome, Director. Good to see you again.
I just want to run through a few things. Some would strike me
as surprising, and some are just hypocritical. I will ask you some
questions at the end, but I do want to deal with a couple of these
at the time.
In comparison to the Breonna Taylor case, it struck me as quite
a surprise. Breonna Taylor was a scenario where no shots were
fired at the officers. I think one of the officers actually made a false
statement. Well, Breonna Taylor, certainly, didn't fire any shots at
any of the officers. It was the officer who was fired who lied in the
affidavit. I think that was found pretty quickly.
In any event, the no knock issue I think is a pretty significant
one. I believe that what is going to happen later today is that there
will be a bill offered, the George Floyd Criminal Justice Act, that
will help to address one of these issues.
So, I hear a lot of concern from my Republican colleagues about
the no knock warrant being executed here. I would note that it is
pretty routine the way this warrant was executed. Hopefully, you
will be willing to support that provision when it is offered today.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 218 of 236

58
Mr. Director, do you want to comment on that?
Mr. DETIELBACH. I just wanted to say that I just wanted to re-
peat again that because this is an ongoing investigation I am not
commenting. There are numerous different things that I believe are
out there that may not be shown to be the facts when the inves-
tigation happened.
So, I would just hope that we could all agree to wait until the
facts come out and assess those facts, because I hear things that
may well not even be correct as a factual matter as things that
Members are talking about.
So, that is one of my hopes here today is just to try and get the
facts out.
Chair JORDAN. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. IVEY. That is a fair point. I will say this: I know an officer
was shot in the execution-
Chair JORDAN. Will the gentleman yield?
Mr. IVEY. I don't have time; I am sorry-in the execution of the
Malinowski warrant. How is that officer doing?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Thank you for asking.
My understanding is that he is recovering.
I can take a lot, and I understand that, but one thing I want to
say is at one point during-people are heated-somebody said
something about somebody got shot in the toe. When a police offi-
cer or an agent is shot at, it is a serious matter. When a police offi-
cer or an agent is actually shot, it is a serious matter.
I know that nobody here would try to minimize an officer being
shot as not being a serious matter. I just want to make sure; I un-
derstand people are heated, maybe I got a little heated just now,
but that is one thing that I just want to make sure that I know
we all agree on that.
Mr. IVEY. I appreciate that.
Also, the funding issue which Mr. Neguse addressed with respect
to paying for body cameras. I know we had; it was a very expensive
thing when we did it in Prince George's County. It was one of the
barriers to getting it done as quickly as we wanted.
I hope that is another one of those where my Republican col-
leagues, since you have expressed such strong desire and concern
about body cameras not being present here, I hope you will be will-
ing to step up now and provide the additional funding in the ATF
budget so they can move forward with that expeditiously.
I also wanted to say this, too. We had another debate a few min-
utes ago about whether firearms are the leading cause of death for
children. The issue, I guess, was do you count infants or 18- or 19-
year-olds, or whatever.
I just want to reiterate that is not the first time we have done
that one. My view then and now is that I think it is a ridiculous
point to focus on from the standpoint of, whether it is first or sec-
ond as a leading cause of death, isn't that enough? Why should we
be OK with it?
Let's say it is the second leading cause of death if you include
infants or something, why would that be OK? Why wouldn't we be
concerned and want to try and find ways to bring those numbers
down?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 219 of 236

59
So, I appreciate the work that you are going on that front, and
support the effort, but, yes, we have to find ways to protect our
kids from these kinds of gun violence incidents.
With respect to the search warrant affidavit, I wanted to offer
that in the record. I ask unanimous consent that this be offered.
Also, the search warrant return, I want to make sure that is in
the record, too.
Chair JORDAN. Without objection.
Mr. IVEY. So, it is clear what was, in addition to an officer being
shot, which did not happen in the Breonna Taylor case, the weap-
ons that were recovered, but also the other types of conduct that
supported the probable cause finding by the judge in that case and
supported the entry.
Then, the last point I want to make, too. The execution of a
search warrant while the people are in the house in the morning,
my experience was that was standard operating procedure. It is ac-
tually unusual to do it any other way.
The reason for that is, it is safer for the officers to try and catch
them by surprise, and also leads to better opportunities to seize
weapons.
So, in this case there were many, many, many. Because they
thought there were 150 weapons in the house, certainly security
and protection for the officers would be a prime consideration.
With that, I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back.
The gentlelady from Indiana is recognized.
Ms. SPARTZ. Thank you.
Director Dettelbach, I wanted to followup on the subject that
Representative Massie was asking about, January 6th type inves-
tigation. It has been over three years since it happened. What are
you still investigating?
Mr. DETTELBACH. We are not the lead investigative agency. It is
the FBI. My understanding is from a public report that there has
been over a thousand interviews conducted.
They are investigating the incident-
Ms. SPARTZ. It seems like you have a roadmap in the FBI not to
answer questions. Everyone can hear it. Every question that is ever
on the investigation. It is very clever.
You guys are brilliant not to answer Congress because every-
thing on the investigation, and then when the investigation ends,
statute of limitations is over, no one gets punished, and you con-
tinue with this. This is happening all the time.
It seems like your agency should do better than that, investigate
something over three years. It seems like you should come to some
conclusion.
My question is related to these changes in your rule, and defini-
tion of what is engaged in business rule.
Do you think criminals just want to do something criminal? Are
they going to read your 500 pages of definitions? Are they going to
read your 500 pages of definition explanations?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I think that I don't know who will read it. I
think that-
Ms. SPARTZ. Do you think criminals will be doing that?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 220 of 236

60
Mr. DETIELBACH. I think that it will also, as I said at the begin-
ning, hopefully increase compliance with the law among people who
are-
Ms. SPARTZ. You understand that criminals are not going to be
reading this. OK?
What is it going to do to law abiding citizens, like Brian
Malinowski that potentially was just selling these guns? I don't
know the whole circumstances, but he is dead because he was prob-
ably not realizing what you were doing in changes of this rule.
So, my question for you is going to be, do you understand how
dangerous your definitions have become?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Respectfully, our definitions are based on the
law that Congress passed.
Ms. SPARTZ. Do you understand that-
Mr. DETTELBACH. It is based on our observation and experience
in the field.
Ms. SPARTZ. Your interpretation?
So, let's just go to your definitions. As a normal American,-
Mr. DETIELBACH. It is based on, its implementation-
Ms. SPARTZ. -I understand your definition-
Mr. DETIELBACH. Let me, it is implementing Congress' law.
Ms. SPARTZ. OK. OK, how are you going to implement it? I want
to understand.
I am a gun owner, and I am going to decide occasionally, yes, oc-
casionally, I can do maybe 100 times, maybe five times. I am not
engaged predominantly for a profit. You know that I don't even
have time to do a profit.
So, at which point as a regular American citizen, so I understand
that you are not going to cutoff my electricity my house and try to
storm the house with bunch of people that you don't even realize
what is going on. So, I can be in situation like a lot of other Ameri-
cans that don't even realize that now you are redefining who the
dealer is.
So, I want to get understanding. Summarize me understanding
how I can explain to my constituents what it means now and how
I am predominantly to earn a profit in this? What is the definition
of this?
Mr. DETTELBACH. The statute that Congress passed says that if
you are engaged in the business of dealing firearms "predominantly
for profit," right, that requires a license.
There are some exceptions then that Congress has asked. Re-
spectfully, people may not read the statutes either. They should,
though, if they are, if they are selling firearms. These aren't pos-
sessors, these are people who are reselling firearms repetitively for
profit.
I don't think it is too much to ask for somebody who is selling
firearms repetitively for profit to read the law.
Mrs. SPARTZ. What does "repetitively" mean.
What is "occasionally" or "repetitively"? If I understand, I have
lots of guns and I decided I want to replace with something else.
I have 50 guns I am going to sell this year. I just decided that I
am, I don't know, maybe they will be for profit. Definitely, no one
is going to sell it at a loss, right? With your rules, probably price
they keep increasing.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 221 of 236

61
So, like, I am going to become a dealer now? I have to register
for that?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Again, I have tried to explain. I will continue
to.
Ms. SPARTZ. I'm trying to explain. So, what do you do? What is
really going to be your new definition, because it is so broad?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. It is not a new definition. It implements Con-
gress' definition. Congress changed the definition.
Ms. SPARTZ. Yes. You put 500 pages of explanation. So, can you
summarize this normal plain language an American can under-
stand?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I believe that our positions are, they are not
secret, they are in court, and they are filed. The rules-
Ms. SPARTZ. Yes, but explain without reading 500 pages that are
confusing.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. The rule seeks by providing practical conduct-
based things that normal people could,-
Ms. SPARTZ. Yes. With the claim-
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. -for instance, you, one of the things that can
result in people, depending on all the circumstances, is you take
credit cards for payment. That could be one of the signs that some-
body is in business.
You read, one of the things that might be on the other side-
Ms. SPARTZ. Well, if I use a little ad and then I sell a gun and
take a credit card I potentially will be a dealer?
Mr. DETrELBACH. One of the things that might be on the other
side is if you are occasionally giving or gifting to family members.
Right? We try to say things on both sides.
Ms. SPARTZ. My time has expired.
I shall tell you, you put American lives in danger in your ATF,
life in danger by doing this because you are doing gun control and
is a very clever way to make everyone a dealer and have a zero
tolerance, and exercise gun control and Second Amendment rights.
You put your people in danger and American people.
I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentlelady yields back.
The gentlelady from Georgia is recognized for a unanimous con-
sent.
Ms. MCBATH. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
The followup on the discussions that we have had on the leading
causes of death for children that have been spoken about by our
colleague from Pennsylvania, and also Mr. Ivey, I would like to ask
unanimous consent to enter into the record an article from April
2022, entitled, "Firearms were the leading cause of death in chil-
dren in 2020."
Also, a second one will be unanimous consent to enter into the
record an article from October titled, "Firearms now the number
one cause of death for U.S. children, while drug poisoning enters
top five."
Chair JORDAN. Without objection.
Ms. MCBATH. Thank you.
Chair JORDAN. The gentlelady from Vermont is recognized for
five minutes.
Ms. BALINT. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 222 of 236

62
Thank you, Director, for being here. I know it has been a long
day. Thank you for your time.
So, as I sit here and I am really struck by what I feel we should
be talking about here is that we have a fairly simple mandate from
the American people, which is to do all we can to stop gun violence.
As my colleagues have said, we have this horrible situation in this
country, parents, teachers having to see children being killed every
day by gun violence.
The country is awash in illegal firearms. We have heard that. We
have accidental shootings by and of children. We have increasing
suicide rates. Of course, mass shootings continue across our Nation.
Public poll after public poll tells us the same thing: People want
us in Congress to do something, to take action. More than half of
Americans consistently support stricter gun laws.
Listening to some of my colleagues you would think that we were
on a different planet. The majority is not evening approaching or
discussing new public protections or stricter gun laws.
The ATF doesn't have the resources to expect firearms dealers,
as directed by Congress right now, over 2,000 firearms dealers
have not undergone any inspection in over 10 years. There are laws
already on the books to help us stem the tide of this violence, but
they aren't being enforced because oftentimes Republicans won't
give them the money to do so.
Now, Director, I appreciate very much that you are here today.
I would like to talk a little bit more specifically about the work that
the ATF does.
You have got a big job. How does your agency carry out its mis-
sion with just over 5,000 employees?
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. It is very difficult.
Ms. BALINT. It is shockingly low given the charge.
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. First, the way we do it is, we have an incred-
ible workforce. The people that, the career people, I am the only
political appointee at the ATF. I am a single Schedule C person,
just me. The people who are the career people get the credit here.
These are agents. These are investigators, lab technicians, ana-
lysts, and staff. They do incredible and dangerous work every day.
The only way to make any progress on this is partnership with
our State and local partners, which we are better than anybody
else with respect to others.
Second, being smart about how we use the intelligence that we
provided to identify the worst of the worst, to make sure that we
are actually taking steps to do two things:
(1) Identify the worst of the worst, the trigger pullers and the
shooters, and get them out of the community, put them where they
belong, incarcerated mainly.
(2) Also, at the same time to do something to enforce the existing
laws to cutoff the supply of guns to those same people. It is far too
easy for killers, felons, gang members, rapists, domestic violence
people to get firearms, even though the law, and everybody agrees,
they shouldn't have them.
So, you have to do both of those two things. It is a two-part strat-
egy. There are people who only want me to do one. There are other
people who only want me to do the other one. The fact of the mat-
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 223 of 236

63
ter is you are not going to make progress unless you have a reason-
able approach on both.
Ms. BALINT. So, to followup on that, how do you go about making
those decisions about priorities?
Are there functions that you, unfortunately, have to de-prioritize
due to the resource constraints that you have? What are those?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. So, you make the decisions based on data as
best the data, that you can find in real time. It is not always per-
fect.
There are, bluntly, there are areas of this country where I wish
that we would have more agents. New York City is an example.
So, in New York City the New York City Police Department is
36,000 strong. I have about 30 people in New York City. It is, it
is absolutely-and we punch way above our weight. That is the
case everywhere.
So, we are making decisions about where the crime threat is.
When I make an investment on the Southwest border, as we, as
we have, not I, we have at the ATF, that means at the ATF that
we can't startup a whole new division. That means we are pulling
agents from some other place that we really care about.
So, we are constantly struggling to balance resources in the best
way we can to face a lot of threats.
Ms. BALINT. Director, I am just about out of time. I think it is
clear that without substantial funding we are not going to improve
our statistics on gun violence, and we are not going to improve our
public safety outcomes. We should be putting the money to work
to help protect our kids.
I say that as a Member of Congress. I also say that as a former
teacher and as a parent of two teenagers. We have to do something
about this and not just talk about it.
Thank you.
Chair JORDAN. The gentlelady yields back?
Ms. BALINT. I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman from North Dakota is recognized.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. We are conflating two issues here. A man is
dead, and an officer was shot not because of rank-and-file law en-
forcement doing their job, but because somebody made a leadership
decision to execute a warrant in the most dangerous way possible
given the circumstances of that case.
We can sell 6:00 a.m., as and standard operating procedure. You
can do that everywhere else.
I have represented three officers in officers-involved shootings. I
spent 10 years dealing with search warrants. I know the facts of
this case. I know where the guy works. I know that he was
surveilled. I know that they chose to implement a warrant in a way
that absolutely maximized the risk of harm both to the person
being served the warrant on and to the officers serving the war-
rant.
I am going to move on. I am going to move on to something else.
Federal gun charges are what we call strict liability- crimes,
right? If you have a gun and you are a prohibited person, that is
the crime. There doesn't need to be intent. There doesn't need to
be any of those things. Right?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Disagree.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 224 of 236

64
Mr. ARMSTRONG. So, if you are a felon in possession of a firearm
you can intend, you can say I didn't know I was a felon?
Mr. DETTELBACH. No. There is an intent requirement in Con-
gress' statute. You can read 922(g)(l). It is in the statute, Con-
gressman.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. You said earlier that the ATF's responsibility is
to implement the laws that Congress passed. Right?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Correct.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. When did the U.S. House pass a rule classifying
a pistol brace as a short-barreled rifle?
Mr. DETTELBACH. That rulemaking is based on the National Fire-
arms Act 1934.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. When did Congress pass a law? They didn't.
Mr. DETTELBACH. In 1934, Congress passed the National Fire-
arms Act, which said that short-barrel rifles were unusually dan-
gerous.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. I am not asking you about-
Mr. DETTELBACH. Congress' words.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. I am not asking you about short-barreled rifles.
I know what short-barreled rifles are called by the National Fire-
arms Act.
When did Congress pass a law saying pistol braces qualify?
When did Congress pass that?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Congress passed; they are covered by the Na-
tional-
Mr. ARMSTRONG. They did not pass the law. They didn't.
When did the President sign the law? He didn't.
The first pistol brace was sold in 2012. A guy walked into a gun
store, bought it legally, walked out of the gun store with a pistol
brace, with a pistol brace rifle. No need for $200, no need for a
stamp.
Mr. DETTELBACH. Are you saying that there is a new brand of
gun that didn't exist in 1968, but the Gun Control Act doesn't
apply to it?
Mr. ARMSTRONG. I am saying in 2012, a guy in Dickinson, North
Dakota walked into a firearms store and bought a gun legally. Cor-
rect? With a pistol brace. Didn't need to do a stamp, didn't need
to do a $200, and didn't need to do a $200 registration.
Mr. DETTELBACH. Again, we look at-
Mr. ARMSTRONG. No. This is a factual question.
The first pistol brace was sold in 2012. Didn't the person who
purchased it need stamp, and did he need the Federal Govern-
ment's permission to buy that gun?
That is in 2012. That is not a hard question.
Mr. DETTELBACH. Respectfully, the 2012, the thing that has been
talked about in this Committee previously, was never brought to
market.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. OK. So, 2015?
Mr. DETTELBACH. It would depend on the actual design of the in-
dividual item. There were numerous different items being manufac-
tured. It changed over time.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. You spent 20 years as a prosecutor. Twenty
years as a prosecutor. You know the answers to these questions.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 225 of 236

65
I am done asking them. I am just going to go with the numbers.
From 2012-2023, the ATF estimates that there are 3-7 million pis-
tol braces sold on the civilian market not requiring the $200 stamp
from the NFA for a short-barreled rifle.
Now, the congressional Research Service says three are 10-40
million of those things purchased in the same period of time. Man-
ufacturer sales estimates are significantly higher than the ATF's
estimate, and those estimates exclude 2020-2022.
Now, the Deputy Chief of the ATF has stated that prior to
June 1, 2023, the 250,162 registrations on retroactive purchases
were received by the ATF.
Does that sound accurate?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I don't know who that person, I don't have a
title like that. The number sounds like the number of people that
during a certain period of time sought registration. The number
does sound familiar, but I don't know the quote that you are mak-
ing.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. Well, I have got a rancher in Southwest North
Dakota who is hunting snow geese through a Federal wildlife ref-
uge. The U.S. Forest and a U.S. agent comes out. He purchased
that rifle legally in 2015. He is out shooting, shooting geese with
a shotgun. U.S. Fish and Wildlife comes in his car and sees a gun
in there with a pistol brace.
What is the penalty for him now? He bought the gun legally,
2015?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Well, again, it is-
Mr. ARMSTRONG. It's 5-10 years and a maximum $250,000 fine.
You talk about costs; you talk about budget cuts. So, let's just as-
sume the low-end number of the ATF number is on 3-7 million.
Three million licenses, thre million guns that were purchased le-
gally without any extra requirement, the ATF has got 255,000 of
those registered.
So, you are roughly saying 2. 7 million people are now felons in
possession of firearms for something they purchased legally?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I respectfully disagree with a lot of the charac-
terizations in your question. The last Administration, Attorney
General Barr issued guidance on this before the ATF even got to
this. People were on notice for years and years and years that you
can't take something and break it into two and then put it together
and treat it differently than the person who buys it in one piece.
Mr. ARMSTRONG. I don't care-they bought a gun legally and you
guys retroactively made it illegal in a different qualification.
Mr. DETTELBACH. Respectfully, I disagree. That is not what the
facts reflect.
Chair JORDAN. The time of the gentleman has expired.
The gentlelady from Missouri is recognized.
Ms. BUSH. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
First, I want to start by offering my condolences to Ms. Mali-
nowski, who I believe was here earlier.
St. Louis and I are here today seeking accountability for the gun
violence epidemic in our country, and for all instances of potential
law enforcement misconduct.
Director Dettelbach, thank you for being here today. Let me say
that I support several of the ATF's recent efforts, including the
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 226 of 236

66
Both Guns Rule, the Stabilizing Brace Rule, and the efforts to stop
gun trafficking.
As gun violence continues to shatter families and communities,
thanks in part to weak gun laws in Republican-controlled States
like mine, in Missouri, equitable and effective enforcement of our
existing laws must be a top priority. There is a difference between
the way the law is written and the way it is enforced, as commu-
nities like St. Louis know all too well.
So, taking on the gun violence epidemic requires asking hard
questions about enforcement.
That is why the last time you were before this Committee I
asked you about the good old boys' roundup. In the 1980s and
1990s the ATF agents organized shameful Whites only events
which the former ATF Director John Magaw characterized as being
racist in nature, anti-Black, and having discrimination, almost
every year.
It may seem like old history, but there are legitimate and recent
concerns about racial bias in the agency's enforcement operations,
specifically in its use of sting operations.
For example, an USA Today investigation from 2014 found that
91 percent of people arrested in the ATF sting operations were
Black or Latino.
When you were U.S. Attorney your office prosecuted these kinds
of cases. Are you aware of these concerns regarding sting oper-
ations? If any, what steps have you taken to address?
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. At the ATF, we are very clear that we don't
look at any of those kinds of factors and it is absolutely a necessity,
Congressman, that law enforcement does not look at these kinds of
factors. I would say there ar~ comments that were made earlier
that I thought somebody was perhaps implying that because some-
body is wealthy or lives in a nice neighborhood, they should be
treated differently than other people.
I know there are lots of people who are in communities where
they economically struggle who are law-abiding citizens. We don't
assume that because of where you live or how much you make, that
you are any more or less likely to be a law-abiding citizen. That
is a core value at the ATF, and it is very important for you to ask
that question and it is very important for me to answer it.
Ms. BUSH. Thank you. I will say that sometimes looking at it,
what you just said though, looking at it and seeing that we do un-
derstand that folks in marginalized communities are often over
criminalized or criminalized period is an issue that we must also
address and fight. I think you started to allude to that and so
thank you.
These questions are essential because for the ATF to be effective
today, it needs to fix the problems of yesterday including its trou-
bled history of racist behavior and enforcement. My concern about
enforcement does not extend only to questions of racism.
There needs to be accountability for all instances of potential
misconduct by the ATF agents, and that is why I do support my
Republican colleagues' efforts to get more information from the
Federal and local law enforcement about the death of Bryan
Malinowski.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 227 of 236

67
I know there is evidence that Mr. Malinowski fired first on the
agents, but the circumstances warrant more information about
what happened that day. I say this because of my solidarity, I want
to be clear, my solidarity, my pursuit for accountability, and my
pursuit of accountability are not conditional.
I will say that I have been surprised to hear my Republican col-
leagues expressing concern about law enforcement shootings, lack
of body cameras, and no-knock warrants. I am surprised because
I, and many of my Democratic colleagues, have pushed for law en-
forcement accountability for years and Republicans have mocked us
and fought against us at every step.
I am surprised because 2023 set another record for law enforce-
ment killings in this country. Police have killed an average of three
people per day. Police disproportionately kill Black people and
there have only been nine days this year where police didn't kill
someone. Yet, Republicans have refused to hold hearings about any
of those deaths. My question is where have you been? Where have
you been? Travon Martin and Mike Brown, we have been pro-
testing for 10 years. We have been protesting. We were shot with
rubber bullets. We have had dogs unleashed. We were hit with tear
gas and rubber bullets.
George Floyd, we were out there for three months. Mike Brown,
we were out there for 400 days. Where were you? Why didn't you
care then because they are Black? I don't understand. All of a sud-
den, now we want to talk, but see the thing of this, when we took
a knee, folks were mad and criticized us. When we were nonviolent,
people still criticized us. All of a sudden, now the difference is it
color? I say this. My solidarity is not conditional.
So, I ask them for the record that their solidarity is not condi-
tional, that they are willing to support oversight and accountability
for all deaths by law enforcement officers regardless of race, eth-
nicity, faith, location, or anything else that they will vote for real
policy solutions that prevent police brutality-
Chair JORDAN. The time-
Ms. BUSH. -as well as programs that keep our communities safe
including gun violence. Yes, I went over because someone else went
over, too. I just want to hear that come from my Republican col-
leagues who care about police brutality, and it affects every person.
Chair JORDAN. Thank you, the time of the gentlelady has ex-
pired.
The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized.
Mr. FITZGERALD. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Director, as you may
know, I am the co-lead, alongside Congressman Stanton of Arizona
on the bill exempting certain less than lethal projectile devices on
the Gun Control Act definition of a firearm, tasers.
The ATF provided some comments on an earlier draft of the bill
noting some concerns with the legislation. I am sure you are aware
of the bill. Does the ATF still have the same concerns that we had
on the earlier version?
Mr. DETTELBACH. Congressman, can I get back to you on that?
I don't want to answer precipitously. I know this is an important
issue for a lot of people, including some in law enforcement who
have expressed views on it. So, can we get back to you on that be-
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 228 of 236

68
cause I don't know whether any changes in the bill have affected
anything.
Mr. FITZGERALD. OK, so let me just-bear with me then and I
will explain some of the arguments. Hopefully, as the Director,
your understanding of the Gun Control Act will be strong enough
to provide some context. The proposed definition of less than lethal
device would be unworkable in the field I think is the issue.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Yes.
Mr. FITZGERALD. Because officers and agents cannot measure the
projectile, velocity, field stops, and searches and seizures.
Mr. DETIELBACH. As opposed to centrally, but you are talking
about out in the field. I understand.
Mr. FITZGERALD. So, the ATF doesn't currently task any of the
firearm velocity in the field on any of the search and seizure stuff.
Is that right or not?
Mr. DETTELBACH. To the best of my knowledge, that is correct.
It is always hard because some of our operations aren't in Wash-
ington. We have operations, field operations that are centralized in
other places. So, I want to be careful, but we have-I think you are
right as a general matter, yes. I will check though and get back to
you. If that is not correct, I will get back to you.
Mr. FITZGERALD. OK, OK. So, to be clear, the ATF right now
though the concerns that this change would be unworkable in the
field hinges on the idea that officers and agents would suddenly
need to start measuring velocity and checking the internal work-
ings, right? I am trying to get to the bottom because I think Con-
gress is way beyond the ATF on this. I think there is a bipartisan
group that certainly is starting to grow when it comes to this tech-
nology. The ATF still seems stuck in where we were 3-5 years ago.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I understand.
Mr. FITZGERALD. Obviously, you are getting the same feedback
that we are because law enforcement wants more-
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. There are exceptions in the current law for law
enforcement, but I understand your concern and we will get back
to you, Congressman. I will commit to you that we will get back
to you.
Mr. FITZGERALD. OK, very good. Very good. So, with the time
that I have left, I just also wanted to submit for the record a letter
from Mr. Earl Griffith who served in the ATF for more than 20
years retiring as a Division Chief of the ATF's Firearm and Ammu-
nition Technology Division.
Mr. Griffith's letter, dated March 6, 2024, is in support of the
bill, H.R. 3269, and suggests that the ATF already has the existing
authority to revisit classification determinations if the manufac-
turer decides to modify a less lethal projectile device into a lethal
configuration. That is what the manufacturers are doing. They are
changing the technology to kind of match up with where the ATF
is at and I think that is unnecessary. I think this thing could be
cleaned up if we would just have somebody pay attention to where
Congress is moving on this, how quickly we are moving on this.
Mr. DETIELBACH. Congressman, my understanding is that the
statutory language that is at issue in a lot of these is to expel a
projectile by means of an explosion. That is causing some of these
classifications. Now, Mr. Griffith, obviously, is a well-respected,
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 229 of 236

69
long-time ATF employee. We will look at the letter and try to get
back to your office of where things stand.
Mr. FITZGERALD. I am just telling Congress is way ahead of is
where the ATF is on this, and that is why I wish it would take a
deeper, longer look at where we are at, because otherwise, the
input that you would have is simply not going to be taken seriously
if the statute is written or if the changes are already made. So, I
would encourage you to do that. I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. Will the gentleman yield for 30 seconds? Will the
gentleman yield? Thank you.
Really quick, you mentioned earlier that we need to be focused
on the facts, particularly relative to the Malinowski case. I just
want to understand. Are you disputing that the ATF was not in
Little Rock, Arkansas ready to execute a raid on the week before,
on March 12, 2024?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I am neither disputing nor-
Chair JORDAN. We saw the video. We saw the video. Right?
Mr. DETTELBACH. There is a lot of-again, this is a slippery
slope. I have to abide by our Department of Justice policy.
Chair JORDAN. Are you saying the ATF wasn't in Little Rock?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I am not saying any of that. I am saying until
the investigation is completed, I am not disputing that fact or any
other fact. I am trying to counsel because I hear a lot of things out
there-
Chair JORDAN. You said earlier things were stated that were not
fact.
Mr. DETTELBACH. There has been a lot of things said, Congress-
man-Mr. Chair, I am sorry.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman from Virginia is recognized.
Mr. CLINE. The death of Bryan Malinowski is a tragedy, but un-
fortunately, it is not a surprise, given the cavalier attitude of the
ATF over the years and the way that they play fast. and loose with
the law, with the facts, and with the lives of American citizens.
I want to ask you about the latest area in which the ATF is play-
ing fast and loose and really taking actions that are going to en-
danger more lives in the future, if we don't see changes and that
is the new attempts to have a universal registration check rule.
As you know, the Gun Control Act makes it unlawful for any per-
son, say a licensed dealer, to engage in the business of dealing in
firearms until he has filed an application with the ATF and re-
ceived a license. The 1986 Act modified the DCA, adding a statu-
tory definition of engaging in the business and then in 2022, Biden
signed into law the BSCA which broadened the definition by elimi-
nating principal objective and replacing it with a requirement to
predominantly earn a profit.
I want to ask you because people who make occasional sales, ex-
changes, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a per-
sonal collection or a hobby, or who sells all or part of his personal
collection of firearms, that was a portion of OPA altered by the
1922 Act with the exclusion-
Mr. DETTELBACH. That language, I believe, this isn't litigation.
Our position-and the rule speaks for itself. I believe you will find
in black and white in the rule that language that you just said. In
black and white in the rule, that language is there.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 230 of 236

70
Mr. CLINE. Yes, that language remains, that exclusion remains,
unaltered by the BSCA. So, these people who make occasional
sales, exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of
a personal collection or for a hobby or who sell all or part of their
personal collection of firearms are exempt from this 1922 Act modi-
fication. Yet, what we see-
Mr. DETTELBACH. For those activities.
Mr. CLINE. Right, for those activities.
Mr. DETIELBACH. They are doing a whole bunch of other things.
Mr. CLINE. Do you believe that a personal collection of firearms
can be for self-defense?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. So, I think again the provisions of the rules
speak for itself. In this format, it is hard to get into a deep debate
on this. We also have filed significant legal papers in courts that
are hearing this and because it is pending litigation, nothing I say
can or should contradict any of those things. The rule sets forth
conduct-based factors which under the totality of circumstances,
right, could give rise to somebody being engaged in the business or
not. It gives examples. It gives examples.
Mr. CLINE. I am glad you said conduct because where did Con-
gress make it a crime to merely intend to earn a profit off selling
a privately owned firearm? Because that is what you are attempt-
ing to-
Mr. DETIELBACH. There clearly is an intent element of the stat-
ute that Congress-
Mr. CLINE. Solely intent? There is no action?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Again, as in many criminal statutes and many
statutes that are regulatory, there is both an act and an intent.
Sometimes those things differ from statute and regulation to other
statutes and regulations. The text of the law and the text of the
rule are always what controls.
Mr. CLINE. Didn't change and so your efforts to become mind
readers over at the ATF and somehow determine intent based on
no activity whatsoever on the part of our gun owner to earn a prof-
it-
Mr. DETIELBACH. Congressman-
Mr. CLINE. It is playing fast and loose with the statute.
Mr. DETIELBACH. Congressman, not even talking about this stat-
ute, but in many, many, many regulatory functions and many ad-
ministrative proceedings, many civil proceedings, people's intent is
part of the determination that finders of fact make. They look at
their words. They look at various different things that they are
doing, and they can infer intent. I think the standard jury instruc-
tion in many cases talks about these things.
Mr. CLINE. Well, I just want to know when Congress authorized
the ATF to require Americans who offer to sell one firearm to an-
other family member, to get a Federal license, submit fingerprints,
maintain gun registration paperwork, register as a business, and
keep regular business hours open for the ATF inspections.
Mr. DETTELBACH. Congressman-
Mr. CLINE. You never did that.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Let me be clear. This is not-the rule cannot
and is not and does not create a universal background check. We
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 231 of 236

71
could not do that. Only Congress could do that, and I want to be
very clear here that the rule does not do that.
Mr. CLINE. I get what you are doing. The ATF is playing too cute
by half. The American people see it. We see it, and we are not
going to allow you to do that. I yield back.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back. The gentlelady from
Wyoming is recognized.
Ms. HAGEMAN. A December 2021 ATF memo alerted the America
people that the ATF was maintaining a digital, searchable, central-
ized registry of guns and gun owners in violation of various Federal
prohibitions and contrary to what you testified to under oath today.
In response, Representative Michael Cloud and 52 House Mem-
bers sent the ATF a letter dated November 22, 2021. The ATF re-
sponded to that letter stating that it had 920,664,765 records,
865,787,086 of which are in a digitalized format which Gun Owners
of America has proved to be searchable. This was discovered short-
ly after the ATF was revealed to have processed over 54 million
records in a single year.
What is the latest record count for the ATF's illegal digital,
searchable, national gun registry?
Mr. DETrELBACH. Zero. We obey the law. None of our records-
Ms. HAGEMAN. According to your letter, you have over 865 mil-
lion of these records are in digitalized format. You have admitted
it.
Mr. DETrELBACH. Respectfully, we are-I think the ATF is the
only customer of Adobe Acrobat that pays money to remove search
functions-
Ms. HAGEMAN. Before the Commerce Justice Science Sub-
committee of the Appropriations Committee in April of last year,
you testified that the ATF pays Adobe Acrobat extra to have cer-
tain search functionality eliminated.
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. That is not correct.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Well, is the ATF's digital database of gun owner
records capable of being opened by normal Adobe Acrobat and
search by name?
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. Again, we pay-
Ms. HAGEMAN. This is a yes or no question. Is it?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. We pay to have search functions limited. We
don't pay Adobe Acrobat. I believe we pay somebody else.
Ms. HAGEMAN. If the ATF asked, could Adobe Acrobat re-enable
name search functionality on the ATF's illegal gun registry?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. It is not an illegal registry. We do not-
Ms. HAGEMAN. If the ATF asked-
Mr. DETrELBACH. We do not search in the method that you are
suggesting. We cannot. These are records that are-we pay a public
safety cost, which Congress balanced for this decision, which is-
Ms. HAGEMAN. If the ATF asked, could Adobe Acrobat re-enable
name search functionality on -the ATF's illegal gun registry?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I am not an expert in Adobe Acrobat coding.
I do know that we do not keep a gun registry. I also know that-
Ms. HAGEMAN. You have records. You have admitted that you
have over 920 million records, over 865 million of which are in digi-
talized format, correct?
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 232 of 236

72
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. If your answer is they somehow scanned in so
that we literally don't have to have 950 million pieces of paper,
that is a lot different from what you are implying with respect to
having a gun registry. It is also true, Congressman, that we don't
have any records of firearms purchases for people who are still in
business, which is the vast majority of currently sold firearms. We
have zero.
Ms. HAGEMAN. You also testified before that Subcommittee that
the ATF's digital database of gun and gun owners is not capable
of being searched by a personal identifier. Can the ATF's gun reg-
istry be searched by make, model, and serial number, enough
searchability to create a list of say all AR-15 owners?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. The answer to your question is we do not cre-
ate, use search and around the registry-
Ms. HAGEMAN. You are not answering my question. You are not
answering my question.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Your question had-respectfully, it was a tech-
nical question with five or six different parts, and I am trying not
to erroneously, as you said I am under oath, I am trying not to er-
roneously misstate things of a technical nature. We do not keep a
registry. We use these things for pending homicide investigations.
It takes us a lot longer to find the name of the killer-
Ms. HAGEMAN. Mr. Dettelbach, you have mentioned gun running
and gun violence associated with Mexican cartels and the crime as-
sociation with that. In fact, you refer to the cartels as "the most
dangerous organizations in the world."
How many conversations have you had with President Biden or
Secretary Mayorkas demanding that they close the Southern bor-
der?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. We do not-
Ms. HAGEMAN. How many discussions have you had with Presi-
dent Biden or Mayorkas about closing the Southern border?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. The answer to your question is-
Ms. HAGEMAN. It's zero.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. We work with DHS on border-related-
Ms. HAGEMAN. How many conversations have you had with them
demanding that they close the Southern border? It is a simple
question.
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. Again, may I answer?
Ms. HAGEMAN. How many conversations have you had demand-
ing-
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. We discuss our border-related security issues
with the DHS frequently.
Ms. HAGEMAN. Have you demanded that they close the Southern
border?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I have had conversations with Secretary
Mayorkas about our efforts-
Ms. HAGEMAN. Have you demanded that they close the Southern
border?
Mr. DE'ITELBACH. I am in the ATF. It is not our jurisdiction to
police the Southern border. That is for the DHS, Congresswoman.
Ms. HAGEMAN. You don't care about crime in this country if you
are not trying to address what is going on at the Southern border.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 233 of 236

73
Mr. DETIELBACH. Respectfully, I deeply disagree. I think it is
very unfair.
Chair JORDAN. The gentlelady's time has expired. The gentleman
from South Carolina is recognized.
Mr. FRY. Thank you, Chair. Director, here is what I find trou-
bling. In 2021, there were five FFL licenses that were revoked, but
in 2023, that number has jumped to 157, I believe. It is a dramatic
increase, in my opinion, and I think we have echoed this on this
side, a very stark indicator of the Biden Administration's aggres-
sive overreach against FFLs. Here is what is worse, an increasing
number of firearms dealers faced with severe and often dispropor-
tionate consequences for minor clerical errors have elected to shut
down their operations rather than endure the extensive and costly
process of defending their practice. This is like David versus Goli-
ath except that Goliath, the U.S. Government, wins because all the
resources are there, and you have a small business trying to defend
themselves against the insurmountable resources of a Federal Gov-
ernment.
Let's take a look at the number of voluntary business closures,
post-inspection, over the last couple of years. In 2021, there were
24; 2022, 69; and 2023, there were 80. This is the result of the
ATF's zero tolerance policy and quite frankly, a very concerning
trajectory of the ATF. This is all occurring under the guise of pub-
lic safety, but the ATF is essentially working to dismantle a very
lawful firearm industry.
Let me ask you something, and this was talked about earlier.
Where can I find authorization from Congress that you would re-
voke somebody's FFL for a minor clerical error? Where is that in
the statute?
Mr. DETIELBACH. The statute and the policy and our implemen-
tation deals with willful violations. By the way, it limits them fur-
ther to violations that endanger public safety. The vast majority-
one thing I think we agree on which I want to say because it is
important. The vast majority of firearms licensees out there are fol-
lowing the law and following the rules.
Mr. FRY. Correct.
Mr. DETIELBACH. They are law-abiding businesses. That is why
over 98, almost 99 percent of our inspections do not result in rev-
ocation. There is due process. People can request a hearing. In the
hearings, Congressman, that we conduct, these are administrative
hearings at the ATF. Half the time, we decide not to revoke be-
cause of something that the FFL presents to us. People have law-
yers at some of those. They don't have lawyers at others. In many
cases, we work with FFLs to try and cure any defects, if they are
clerical defects, to make the FFL stronger in terms of a target for
people who-not the FFL is doing some illegal, but others are tak-
ing advantage of weak controls. That can be a public safety threat
as well, as you know. Even a law-abiding FFL, if they are not care-
ful, can be taken advantage of by straw purchaser-
Mr. FRY. Director, here is my concern and I know we have got
limited time, and I am very respectful of yours. The BSCA was
passed in 2022. Based on that, there has been a slight modification
to the rule, but •
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 234 of 236

74
Even a single transaction or offer to engage in a transaction when combined
with other evidence may be sufficient to require a license as an FFL.
So, you are inferring from that and again, I think this is where
the minor clerical errors come in, Congress has made no law to
this. There is a 2022 amendment, but I think you have largely ig-
nored another statute, 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(21). Are you familiar with
that statute?
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. I am familiar with all the code-
Mr. FRY. What does that say? Director, what does that statute
say?
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. I believe it is the provision you are talking
about for importers, which is the provision that you are referring
to?
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. OK, so the engaged-
Mr. FRY. That term:
Engaged in business shall not include a person that makes occasional sales,
exchanges, or purchases of firearms for the enhancement of a personal col-
lection or a hobby or who sells all or part of their personal collection or fire-
arm.
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. That is quoted in the rule.
Mr. FRY. Right. The concern that I have though is that not the
application of the ATF because you are taking a very heavy-handed
approach. Again, you have to look at the disproportionality of this
is that you have the heavy hand of government. You have the en-
forcement. You are creating these rules, which are beyond the
scope of what Congress has implied or directed. You are using this
to target people. Again, I am not talking about the bad actors. I
am talking about lawful businesses who are trying to do the right
thing and have minor clerical errors.
Let me ask you something really quick. I want to shift gears.
Can you describe Spartan? What is Spartan?
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. Spartan is the name of the general case man-
agement system that exists at the ATF. It replaced an older sys-
tem. The system had been in service for many, many years. It was
no longer supported anymore by the technology out there, so we re-
placed it with a new case management system.
Mr. FRY. Now, the ATF administrative investigators are tasked
with determining whether or not willfully did anything and accord-
ing to a recent ATF revocation hearing, whether "in preparing the
report of violations is the issue of willfulness, even a factor?" The
ATF Director responded "I input data and Spartan does the fig-
uring."
Are we allowing AI to determine whether or not something is
willful or not?
Mr. DETI'ELBACH. I am so glad you asked-absolutely not. We,
people, human beings review all these things at supervisory levels.
You cannot revoke somebody without several levels of approval.
Chair JORDAN. The time of the gentleman has expired. The gen-
tleman yields back. The gentleman from Texas is recognized.
Mr. HUNT. Thank you, Mr. Chair. We are almost done, sir.
Thank you for being here for a second time. Thank you for your
time. I really appreciate it.
Basic question, sir. You are an attorney, correct? It is my under-
standing.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 235 of 236

75
Mr. DETTELBACH. Yes, I am, sir.
Mr. HUNT. Well, I am going to give you the benefit of the doubt
knowing that you understand the Constitution, including our Bill
of Rights, correct?
Mr. DETTELBACH. I hope so, sir.
Mr. HUNT. So, what is your interpretation of our Second Amend-
ment? Do you think Americans have the right to bear arms, yes or
no. Just give me your brief overall view of it.
Mr. DETTELBACH. Yes, and I think what we do is we look to what
the Supreme Court has decided on this. The Supreme Court, Con-
gressman, has been very clear on this. The law, the Second Amend-
ment jurisprudence is lengthy and changing. AB a lawyer, I don't
get to decide this. The courts decided it and the courts have said,
yes, is the answer to your question.
Mr. HUNT. OK, so we have these Second Amendment rights be-
cause we know how important it is for us to maintain our constitu-
tional republic and a functioning republic because, again, as a gun
owner myself, as a lawful gun owner myself, it is very important
to me to be able to protect my home and also prevent tyrannical
governments from infringing on our rights as human beings be-
stowed to us in our Constitution.
So, it is my humble opinion, sir, that the ATF is certainly in-
fringing on a lot of these rules for law-abiding citizens and infring-
ing on our Second Amendment rights for law-abiding citizens. I am
not talking about trying to catch bad guys that have guns. I am
talking about implementing a level of pain on people like me that,
quite frankly, was not given-was not bestowed to us-that is be-
stowed to us via the Second Amendment.
Unfortunately, as bureaucrats attempting to infringe on our Sec-
ond Amendment rights that some lawmakers of Congress, they see
gun owner tragedies as an opportunity to slowly chip away at these
rights. So, recently lawmakers used the heartbreaking Uvalde trag-
edy as an opportunity to pass red flag legislation. That is a fact.
I remember a time we were told that red flag laws were simply
a conspiracy theory. I am old enough to remember that. They are
not a conspiracy theory anymore, sir. Red flag laws are in bills, and
they are in Biden's Executive Orders. If you don't know what red
flags are, in short, red flag laws are a type of precrime enforcement
where courts grant orders allowing for the seizure of firearms from
someone who hasn't committed an actual crime.
When I think of red flag laws, I see the Safer Communities Act
which President Eiden signed into law in 2022. The Safer Commu-
nities Act includes a $750 million in funding for States to imple-
ment and improve red flag laws. Again, that is going after the good
guys, not the bad guys. It hasn't stopped there, sir. Eiden in 2023
announced an Executive Order on gun control with the goal of "in-
creasing the effective use of red flag laws."
Eiden also opened the Office of Gun Violence Prevention, led by
Kamala Harris, which has further encouraged and entrenched red
flag laws across the Nation. These are all the facts. I am still wait-
ing for her to tell us what the root causes are of the border crisis,
and you are going to try to tell me that Kamala Harris is going to
tell us the root causes of gun violence. Good luck with that.
Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 236 of 236

76
Finally, the ATF has expanded on its Safer Communities Act by
issuing a new ruling that in practice will implement universal
background checks. I am going to say the quiet part out loud be-
cause we are almost done. Whenever a gun tragedy occurs in this
country, we always hear the left say we have to do something. We
have to do more. Then once legislation is passed, my colleagues on
the left then say we have to always do more and more and more.
I am going to warn the American people that we have to do
more, what we have to do more really, really means. First, they
come after the AR-15s. Then, they come after the sporting rifles.
Then they come after your long guns. When homicides have not de-
creased because you take away all those weapons, and keep in
mind, the AR-15 is responsible for six percent of homicides in this
country, they are going to come after your hand guns and disarm
our country, and disarm our rights and take away our Second
Amendment rights that have been given to us by our Founding Fa-
thers.
Rather than take away guns from law-abiding citizens, instead,
we should be going after criminals, specifically criminals. The rea-
son why I am talking about red flag laws is because the American
public understands that we are going to start having mission creep
here. You go after one thing, you go after another thing, and then
there is always more. There is always going to be a fight. We are
using tragedies to infringe on rights that have been to us by our
Second Amendment. It is you, being head of the ATF, I need you
to be cognizant and very aware of that because most of the people
in Texas that are ranch owners, AR-15 owners like myself, combat
veterans like myself, we don't need more laws. We implement the
laws that we have on the books and go after the bad guys that
have guns, not the good guys, and that is your job. Thanks for
being here, sir. I yield back the rest of my time.
Chair JORDAN. The gentleman yields back. Director, thank you
for being here. I apologize. We have got to run to votes and so we
are going to sprint out of here. We appreciate you being here for
3½ hours and answering our questions. Thanks, again, sir.
That concludes today's hearing. Without objection, all Members
will have five legislative days for additional written questions for
the witness or additional materials for the record. Without objec-
tion, the hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 1:29 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
All materials submitted for the record by Members of the Com-
mittee on the Judiciary can be found at: https: I Idocs.house.gov I
Committee I Calendar I ByEvent.aspx?EventlD=l 17349.

0
 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1-1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 1 of 2
'1544 ~o3n4> ' CIVIL COVER SHEET l.\:2'5-c_v.~ - ~
The IS 44 civil cover sheet and the infonnation contained hen:in neither replace nor supplemem the filing and service of pleading.s or other papers as required by law, except as
provided by local rules of court. This form, appro,;ed by the Judicial Conference of the United States in September 1974, is required for the use of the Clede of Court for the
pwpose of initiating the civil docket sheeL (SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON NEXT PAGE OF THIS FORM.)
I. (a) PLAINTIFFS DEFEND.Al\'TS

Malinowski, Maria ("Maer") See attached list.

(b) County of Residence ofFirst Listed Plaintiff Pulaski County County of Residence of First Listed Defendant
(EXCEPT IN U.S. PLAINTIFF CASES) (IN US. PLAINTIFF CASES ONLY)
NOTE: IN LAl'ID CONDEMNATION CASES, USE THE LOCATION OF
THE TRACT OF LAND INVOLVED.
( C) Attorneys (Firm Name, Addrass, and T11/1phona Number) Attorneys (1/Kno.,.,.n)

See attachment

Il. BASIS OF JURISDICTION (Ptacaan nX" 1n OnaBuxOntyJ ill. CITIZENSHIP OF PRINCIPAL PARTIES (Placaon nr1nOnaBaxforP/aintlff
(For Di'lwsity CasBS Only) and Ona Box/or Defendant}
01 U.S. Government 03 Federal Question PTF DEF PTF DEF
Plaintiff (U.S. Gowm,ment Not a Party) Citizen oflbis State 00 1 D Incmpmatcd or Principal Place D 4 D4
ofBusiness In This State

02 U.S. Gm-emmmt 04 Diversity Citizen of Another State 02 □ 2 Inc:mporatcd and Principal Place os Os
Defendant (]ndicata CitiZBIIShip ofPartiBS In Item ID} of Business In Another State

Citizen or Subject of a 03 □ 3 Forrigo Nation 06 06

Fomgo Country
IV. NATURE OF SUIT (Placean "X''tnOneBuxOntyJ Click here for: aturc of Suit Code Dcscri tions.
COXTRACT TORTS

~
llOinsmance PERSONAL INJ1i"RY PI.RSONAL INJli"RY 625 Drug Rdatcd Seizure 422 Appeal 28 USC 158 375 False Claims Ad
l20Marine 310 Ai!plane O 365 Pasona1 Injury - of Proprrty 21 USC 881 423 Withdrawal 376 Qui Tam (JI USC
130 Miller Ad 315 Ai!planc Product Product Liability 690 Other 28 USC 157 3729(a))
140 Negotiable lDstmmmt Liability O 367 Hcal1h Carel INTELLECTUAL 400 State Reapportionment
D 150 Recovely ofOvapayment 320 Assault, ul>d &: Phannaceutical PROPERn· RIGHTS 410 Antitrust
& Enforammt of Judgment Slander Personal IoiUIY t;:::::::-8-2-0~--.gh-ts----t-, 430 Banks and Banting
0 151 Medicare Ad 330 Federal Employas' Product Liability 830 Patent 450 Commerce
D 152 Recovely of Defaulted Liability O 368 Asbestos Personal 835 Patent -Abbmliated 460 Deportation
Sludenl Loans 340 Marine Injury Product New Drug Application 470 Rackdeer Influenced and
(Excludes Veter.ms) 345 Marine Product Liability t - - - - - ; - - : - ; ; = - - - , i , . . . 840 Trademadc Corrupt Organizations
0 153 Recovelyof()vapayment
ofVcman's Benefits
0 160 Stoc:tholdels' SUits
Liability
350 Motor Vehicle
355 Motor Vehicle
8 PI.RSONAL PROPE.RTY
370 Other Fr.rod
371 Truth in Lending
LABOR
710 Fair Labor Standanls
Ad
880 Defcad Trade Setnts
Act of 2016
480 Consumer Credit
(15 USC 1681 or 1692)
485 Telephone Consumer

§ 190 Other Contract

195 Contract Product Liability •
196 F1211Chisc
Product Liability
360 Other Personal
Injury
O
O
380 Other Personal
ProprJty Damage
385 ProprJty Damage
TIO Labor/Mmagemmt
Rdations
740 Railway Labor Ad
l----=s-=o-=CL:,:U.,.,,....,SE=CURITI==,.,..--r-
861 HIA (139Sff)
862 Black Lung (923)
Protection Ad
490 Cable/Sal 1V
850 Securities/Commoditiesi
362 Pasonal Injury - Product Liability 751 Family and Medical 863 DIWC/DIWW (405(g)) Exchange
Medical Malpractice Leave Act 864 SSID Tille XVI 890 Other Stitutmy Actions
i,...,_,.;;REAL=;:;;,;:P;.:.R;;.;:O;.:.P.=E:::.;R:::.n:::.'_ ___.__.,..,c;,;·n;.,;"IL.;,;:.:;.;:RI;:,:G::;:H;;,;T,.;:S'e---1-=P:::.;RIS=..;:O;.:.:'i;.:.iER;,;;..;;P-=E-=I:::.;m;.;;.;;.o;;..:-,;s~I=, 790 Other Labor Litigation 865 RSI (405(g)) 891 Agricultural Acts
210 Land Condano:dion 440 Other Civil Rights Bab.as Corpus: 791 Employee Rdirmieot 893 Environmental Mattas
220 Foreclosun: 44 l Voting 463 Alien Detainee Income Security Act l--:FED==1:=R"":U.-=""=T,..,,_~-==x=-=su=ITT=s=---+-1 895 Frmtom of Information
230 Rall Lease&: Ejectmmt 442 Employment 510 Motions to Vacate 870 Taxes (U.S. PlaintiJJ Ad
240 Torts to Land 443 Housing/ Sentence or Defendant) 896 Aroilr.rtion
245 Tort Product Liability Acconanodations 530 Gaiera1 1---=-====-.-==--I- 871 IRS-lbird Party 899 Adminis1rative Procalmc
0 290 AD Olher ha! l'roprJty 445 Amer. w/Disabililies - 535 Death Ptnalty 12\DIIGR.-HIO~ 26 USC 7609 Act/Review or Appeal of
Employment Other: 462 Natmaliz.ation Application Agency Decision
446 Amer. w/Disabililies - 540 Mandamus &: Other 465 Other Immigration 950 Constitutionality of
Other 550 Civil Rights Actions State Stalules
448 Education 555 Prison Condition
560 Civil Dd2inec -
Conditions of
Confinement
V. ORIGIN (Plauan "X"tnOnaBuxOntyJ
0 I Original 02 Removed from 0 3 Remanded from 0 O
4 Reinstated or 5 TtanSfencd from 0 6 Multidistrict 0 8 ~~ti~ct
Proceeding State Court Appellate Court Reopened Another District Litigation - L11tga1ton -
(specify) Transfer Direct File
Cite the U.S. Civil Statute under which you are filing (Do not dte jnrisdicnonal stat11tes 1111less dn-nsit)'):
VI. CAUSE OF ACTION 28 u.s.c. §§ 2671 et seq. & § 1346, et seq.
Brief description of cause:
Death ancl or other Injuries caused by Institutional failures ancl negligent or wrongfUI acts Of one or more empioyees of Ille United states govem~
VD. REQUESTED IN 0 CHECK IF TiilS IS A CLASS ACTION DEMANDS CHECK YES only if demanded in complaint:
COMPLAINT: UNDERRULE23,F.R.Cv.P. JURYDEl\lA!'lil>: 0Yes 0No
VIII. RELATED CASE(S)
IF AN"'
• 1
(See Instructions):
RIDGE Judge Lee Ruelofsky OOCKET NUMBER 4:24-<V-00850-LPR
DATE
05/1512025
3£ /1 , SIGNATIJREOFAITOR."IEYOFRECORD

FOR OFFICE USE ONL\'

~.g,44... «2

AMOUNT APPLYING IFP JUDGE MAG.JUDGE

 Case 4:25-cv-00486-BSM Document 1-1 Filed 05/15/25 Page 2 of 2

CIVIL COVER SHEET ATTACHMENT

Plaintiff Counsel

• Bud Cummins
Law Office of Bud Cummins, P.L.C
1818 N. Taylor Street, #301
Little Rock. Arkansas 72207
• Paul James
Matt Stauffer
James & Carter, P.L.C.
100 River Bluff Dr., Suite 420
Little Rock, Arkansas 72202
• Nathan F. Garrett (pro hac vice forthcoming)
Lucinda H. Luetkemeyer (pro hac vice forthcoming)
Graves Garrett Greim LLC
1100 Main Street, Suite 2700
Kansas City, Missouri 64105
• Deborah Truby Riordan
Appellate Solutions, PLLC (d/b/a Riordan Law Firm)
1501 N. University Avenue, Suite 310
Little Rock, Arkansas 72207

Defendants
• United States of America
• Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)
• Agents of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (Sued Individually)
o Timothy Boles
o Troy Dillard
o Clayton Merrill
o Tyler Cowart
o Matthew Sprinkle
o James Bass
o Michael Gibbons
o Chris Griggs
o Shannon Hicks
o AmyNess