Are Pistol braces legal in 2025?

[KY DAN]

Can someone with better insights please explain this situation?

I saw the atf did a thing on social media about their zero tolerance stuff.

 

[LiveLife]

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, just a random layperson posting on THR.

While there were many legal challenges, the most significant has been the Mock v Bondi case - https://www.firearmspolicy.org/mock

District Court judge Reed O'Connor issued a final merits decision striking down the pistol brace Rule entirely nationwide stating "the final Rule was not a logical outgrowth from the proposed Rule; therefore, the final Rule must be set aside as unlawful ..." - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1463184#msg1463184

ATF appealed to the 5th Circuit (Under Biden administration/DOJ) but after Trump became President, DOJ/ATF now had to comply with President Trump's Executive Order on the Second Amendment and DOJ/ATF lawyers made this request to the 5th Circuit - https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fi...2.13_053_Motion_to_Hold_Appeal.pdf?1739481210

"2. Following a change in administration, on February 7, 2025, President Trump issued Executive Order 14206, Protecting Second Amendment Rights. Among other things, the Order directs the Attorney General to 'examine' various“actions of executive departments and agencies” to 'assess any ongoing infringements of the Second Amendment rights of our citizens, and present a proposed plan of action to the President, though the Domestic Policy Advisory, to protect the Second Amendment rights of all Americans.' And the Order specifically directs the Attorney General, as part of that process, to review all 'rules promulgated by the Department of Justice, including by the Bureau of Alcohol,Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, from January 2021 through January 2025 pertaining to firearms and/or Federal firearms licenses.'​

​

3. In light of that development, the government respectfully moves to hold this case in abeyance for 60 days pending review of the challenged rule."​

​

And 5th Circuit granted that request - https://assets.nationbuilder.com/fi..._ORDER_Granting_Motion_to_Stay.pdf?1741042269

"IT IS ORDERED that Appellants’ unopposed motion to stay is GRANTED as stated herein. This appeal is ABEYED until April 14, 2025, at which point the abeyance shall automatically dissolve. Appellants are permitted to file a status report as stated in their motion."​

I saw the atf did a thing on social media about their zero tolerance stuff.

Under President Trump's Executive Order on the Second Amendment, DOJ/ATF recently repealed Biden's anti-2A policies and pistol brace Rule is under review to fulfill President's Executive Order - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/pistol-braces-still-for-sale.928495/post-13115419

"DOJ and ATF have plans to revisit the regulatory framework surrounding stabilizing braces (Final Rule 2021R-08F) ... The decision to review the Stabilizing Brace rule, which sought to reclassify certain firearms as short-barreled rifles ... reiterates constitutional approaches to firearm regulations"

DOJ, ATF Repeal FFL Inspection Policy and Begin Review of Two Final Rules - https://www.atf.gov/news/press-rele...ction-policy-and-begin-review-two-final-rules​

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The Department of Justice and the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives announced today the repeal of the Enhanced Regulatory Enforcement Policy and the review of Final Rule 2021R-08F, related to stabilizing braces, and Final Rule 2022R-17F, related to the definition of “engaging in the business” of firearms dealing.​

The Enhanced Regulatory Enforcement Policy, aka the Zero Tolerance Policy, was a strategy announced in 2021 that set more stringent criteria for Industry Operations compliance inspections to identify licensees with certain qualifying violations. As of today, this policy will be repealed, and Industry Operations inspections will no longer be held to these previously set guidelines.​

Additionally, DOJ and ATF have plans to revisit the regulatory framework surrounding stabilizing braces (Final Rule 2021R-08F) and the definition of “engaged in the business” of firearms dealing (Final Rule 2022R-17F).​

“This Department of Justice believes that the 2nd Amendment is not a second-class right,” said U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi. “The prior administration’s ‘Zero Tolerance’ policy unfairly targeted law-abiding gun owners and created an undue burden on Americans seeking to exercise their constitutional right to bear arms – it ends today.”​

“Today’s repeal of the Zero Tolerance Policy and the comprehensive review of stabilizing brace regulations and the definition of ‘engaged in the business’ marks a pivotal step toward restoring fairness and clarity in firearms regulation,” said Acting ATF Director Kash Patel. “We are committed to working with all stakeholders to ensure our policies are balanced, constitutional and protective of Americans’ Second Amendment rights.”​

The decision to review the Stabilizing Brace rule, which sought to reclassify certain firearms as short-barreled rifles, as well as revising the guidelines for determining who is considered "engaged in the business" of selling firearms, reiterates constitutional approaches to firearm regulations.​

The DOJ and ATF will conduct an in-depth review over the coming months and will engage in consultations with stakeholders, including gun rights organizations, industry leaders and legal experts. Further updates on the status of these reviews will be released in due course.​

 

[LiveLife]

Under President Trump's Executive Order on the Second Amendment, DOJ/ATF recently repealed Biden's anti-2A policies and pistol brace Rule is under review to fulfill President's Executive Order - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/pistol-braces-still-for-sale.928495/post-13115419

"DOJ and ATF have plans to revisit the regulatory framework surrounding stabilizing braces (Final Rule 2021R-08F) ... The decision to review the Stabilizing Brace rule, which sought to reclassify certain firearms as short-barreled rifles ... reiterates constitutional approaches to firearlm regulations"

UPDATE: DOJ drops SBR charge for braced CZ Scorpion pistol after GOA/FRAC joint letter - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1472148#msg1472148

 

[Highland Lofts]

So what is the simple answer
Yes they are legal
Or
No they are not legal

 

[LiveLife]

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, just a random layperson posting on THR.

what is the simple answer

We are currently under judge O'Connor's final ruling which struck down pistol brace Rule in its entirety nationwide - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/are-pistol-braces-legal-in-2025.939375/post-13117281

And as of today, DOJ dropped the charge that designated braced CZ Scorpion pistol as SBR - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1472148#msg1472148

DOJ and ATF will continue to review the Stabilizing Brace Rule in the meanwhile in order to fulfill President Trump's Executive Order on Second Amendment with review work likely assigned to newly formed 2A Task Force by AG Pam Bondi - https://armedpolitesociety.com/index.php?topic=70249.msg1472068#msg1472068

 

[old lady new shooter]

"IT IS ORDERED that Appellants’ unopposed motion to stay is GRANTED as stated herein. This appeal is ABEYED until April 14, 2025, at which point the abeyance shall automatically dissolve. Appellants are permitted to file a status report as stated in their motion."

So, April 14th was a few days ago. Where are we now?

 

[LiveLife]

So, April 14th was a few days ago. Where are we now?

Disclaimer: I am not a lawyer, just a random layperson posting on THR.

To this layperson, District Court judge O'Connor's final merits decision stands nationwide. If I am reading 5th Circuit granting of ATF request incorrectly, more informed lawyers likes of @Frank Ettin, @Spats McGee, let me know.

 

[rust collector]

If you are here in search of simple answers, you must learn to live with disappointment.

The Mock v Bondi matter was ruled upon by Judge O'Connor and the court's ruling was appealed by DOJ. A request for stay pending appeal was unopposed, and the DOJ was given additional time to pursue the appeal due to the change in administration and exec order to review 2A policy and litigation. It appears to me that the timeout expired April 14, 2025 so the DOJ must now proceed within normal time constraints or the appeal may be considered abandoned/defaulted. The most recent activity I found was notice of withdrawal of Abby Wright, one of the DOJ counsel.

My reading is that the stay continues in force until the appeal is denied/abandoned/dismissed. The stay refers to the district court's determination that the rule is invalid, so the brace rule may still be enforced.

I have not followed this case closely as I usually wait until the dust settles, so that is the best I can glean from what I have seen.

 

[Highland Lofts]

The stay refers to the district court's determination that the rule is invalid, so the brace rule may still be enforced.

That would be a simple answer,
THANK YOU RUST

 

[BBarn]

Though a court made the determination that the rule is invalid, the rule can still be enforced. What a system of justice.

 

[Robbins290]

So what is the simple answer
Yes they are legal
Or
No they are not legal

I still have not read/heard a solid answer yet. I have a brace and been waiting for a year before I start building a pistol.

 

[LiveLife]

the brace rule may still be enforced.

Thanks for pointing that out as recently charged by DOJ Biden-carryover staff designating braced CZ Scorpion pistol as SBR, which fortunately was dropped by Trump appointed DOJ staff.

I still have not read/heard a solid answer yet. I have a brace and been waiting for a year before I start building a pistol.

District court ruling vacated the entire pistol brace Rule nationwide and likely Trump appointed DOJ and ATF Chief Counsel along with Pam Bondi's 2A Task Force will work to fulfill Executive Order on Second Amendment so things are looking good for us.

Since this is "Legal" and not "General Gun Discussions", our hopes and dreams are not the focus and actual court rulings matter, all the way to the Supreme Court unless something happens before that.

Anymore speculations/comments/opinions not directly pointed to court case filings should be expressed in "General Gun Discussions" as that is the subcategory for opinions and comments. (Nod to @Frank Ettin)

 

[Robbins290]

Thanks for pointing that out as recently charged by DOJ Biden-carryover staff designating braced CZ Scorpion pistol as SBR, which fortunately was dropped by Trump appointed DOJ staff.


District court ruling vacated the entire pistol brace Rule nationwide and likely Trump appointed DOJ/ATF Chief Counsel and Pam Bondi's 2A Task Force will work to fulfill Executive Order on Second Amendment so things are looking good for us. Since this is "Legal", our hopes and dreams are not the focus and actual court rulings matter, all the way to the Supreme Court unless something happens before that.

Lets hope so.

I do have a question Tho. Is it legal to have a SBA3 brace on a completed lower but no upper? I have no pistol uppers kicking around. Just this lower and about 7 stripped lowers.

 

[dogtown tom]

Lets hope so.

I do have a question Tho. Is it legal to have a SBA3 brace on a completed lower but no upper? I have no pistol uppers kicking around. Just this lower and about 7 stripped lowers.

Of course.
An arm brace by itself was never regulated.
An arm brace on a lower or other receiver was never regulated.
An arm brace attached to a rifle was never regulated.

The gray area was whether attaching an arm brace to a pistol constituted the making of a short barreled rifle. The idea being it wasn't really an arm brace but a wink wink shoulder stock.

And again, there is no such animal as a "pistol lower" or "pistol upper". Only uppers and lowers. It is possible to assemble a pistol with an upper receiver with a barrel of any length.

 

[lancegrsn78]

Pistol braces are legal at the federal level. (as of 2024) The ATF’s 2023 rule was struck down by federal courts, and the rule is no longer in effect. However, legal challenges are ongoing, so the situation could change.

Link removed by Spats McGee

 

[rust collector]

Pistol braces are legal at the federal level. (as of 2024) The ATF’s 2023 rule was struck down by federal courts, and the rule is no longer in effect. However, legal challenges are ongoing, so the situation could change.

Link removed by Spats McGee

Your "reference" is to a June, 2024 news item. A few things have happened since then, which you would realize if you had read post #8.

Please don't link to articles, especially stale ones. It may put someone in a difficult situation.

 

[Robbins290]

Of course.
An arm brace by itself was never regulated.
An arm brace on a lower or other receiver was never regulated.
An arm brace attached to a rifle was never regulated.

The gray area was whether attaching an arm brace to a pistol constituted the making of a short barreled rifle. The idea being it wasn't really an arm brace but a wink wink shoulder stock.

And again, there is no such animal as a "pistol lower" or "pistol upper". Only uppers and lowers. It is possible to assemble a pistol with an upper receiver with a barrel of any length.

ATF thinks different, IF you read this. IT sums it up as "rifle first, rifle forever, pistol first, you can switch back and forth."

That's why I always make sure when I do the NICS, it shows up as "other"

 

[dogtown tom]

ATF thinks different,

No, they don't.

IF you read this. IT sums it up as "rifle first, rifle forever, pistol first, you can switch back and forth."

I'm fully aware of ATF Ruling 2011-4, having posted links to it dozens of times here on THR.
It has nothing to do with my response above.

"First a rifle, always a rifle" has nothing to do with "pistol lower" or "rifle lower".
Years ago, some companies would sell an AR lower marked PISTOL as if that had any meaning. It didn't and one could make that into a rifle. But due to 201104, you couldn't subsequently reassemble into a pistol. So the PISTOL engraving was irrelevant.

That's why I always make sure when I do the NICS, it shows up as "other"

A frame, receiver or lower is an "Other Firearm" on the Form 4473 because it isn't a rifle or handgun until assembled as such.
It could be a complete lower with shoulder stock and yet......its still a lower and could lawfully be assembled into a pistol by first removing that shoulder stock.

 

[Robbins290]

No, they don't.





I'm fully aware of ATF Ruling 2011-4, having posted links to it dozens of times here on THR.
It has nothing to do with my response above.

"First a rifle, always a rifle" has nothing to do with "pistol lower" or "rifle lower".
Years ago, some companies would sell an AR lower marked PISTOL as if that had any meaning. It didn't and one could make that into a rifle. But due to 201104, you couldn't subsequently reassemble into a pistol. So the PISTOL engraving was irrelevant.


A frame, receiver or lower is an "Other Firearm" on the Form 4473 because it isn't a rifle or handgun until assembled as such.
It could be a complete lower with shoulder stock and yet......its still a lower and could lawfully be assembled into a pistol by first removing that shoulder stock.

No, they don't.





I'm fully aware of ATF Ruling 2011-4, having posted links to it dozens of times here on THR.
It has nothing to do with my response above.

"First a rifle, always a rifle" has nothing to do with "pistol lower" or "rifle lower".
Years ago, some companies would sell an AR lower marked PISTOL as if that had any meaning. It didn't and one could make that into a rifle. But due to 201104, you couldn't subsequently reassemble into a pistol. So the PISTOL engraving was irrelevant.


A frame, receiver or lower is an "Other Firearm" on the Form 4473 because it isn't a rifle or handgun until assembled as such.
It could be a complete lower with shoulder stock and yet......its still a lower and could lawfully be assembled into a pistol by first removing that shoulder stock.

You can still do a 4473 as a pistol with a striped lower. So wouldn't that make it legally a "pistol" lower?

Or if I bought this ar15 pistol from PSA (https://palmettostatearmory.com/psa...ide-classic-pistol-w-har-15-pistol-brace.html), and I took all the parts off until it was a striped receiver. Wouldn't that make it technically "pistol lower" as I bought it was a legit pistol.

That is the point I was trying to say. You can still have a "pistol lower"

 

[LiveLife]

Since this is "Legal" and not "General Gun Discussions", our hopes and dreams are not the focus and actual court rulings matter, all the way to the Supreme Court unless something happens before that.

Anymore speculations/comments/opinions not directly pointed to court case filings should be expressed in "General Gun Discussions" as that is the subcategory for opinions and comments. (Nod to @Frank Ettin)

And reminder from "Legal" subcategory banner - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?forums/legal.4/

"In the Legal Forum we try to understand what the law is (including court decisions and proposed laws), how it works, and how it applies to RKBA issues. We focus on the way things are – not the way we think they should be."​

 

[dogtown tom]

You can still do a 4473 as a pistol with a striped lower.

No, you can't.
A stripped lower does not meet the definition of "pistol" in ATF regulations. Any dealer that ignores the clear instructions on the Form 4473 runs the risk of losing his FFL.

Question 24. Category of Firearm(s): “Other” refers to frames, receivers, and
other firearms that are neither handguns nor long guns (rifles or shotguns), such as
firearms having a pistol grip that expel a shotgun shell, or National Firearms Act
(NFA) firearms, including silencers. If a frame or receiver can only be made into a
long gun (rifle or shotgun), it is still a frame or receiver, not a handgun or long gun.
All frames and receivers are “firearms” by definition, and subject to the same GCA
limitations. See 18 U.S.C § 921(a)(3)(B). 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(1) makes it unlawful
for a licensee to sell any firearm other than a shotgun or rifle to any person under the
age of 21. Since a frame or receiver for a firearm, to include one that can only be
made into a long gun, is a “firearm other than a shotgun or rifle,” it cannot be transferred
to anyone under the age of 21, nor can these firearms be transferred to anyone
who is not a resident of the State where the transfer is to take place. Also, note that
multiple sales forms are not required for frames or receivers of any firearms, or pistol
grip shotguns, since they are not “pistols or revolvers” under 18 U.S.C.§ 923(g)(3)(A).

So wouldn't that make it legally a "pistol" lower?

No.
If you have this

It's recorded in Section A of the form 4473 as "Receiver" and on Question 24 as "Other firearm"......exactly as described in the instructions.

Or if I bought this ar15 pistol from PSA (https://palmettostatearmory.com/psa...ide-classic-pistol-w-har-15-pistol-brace.html), and I took all the parts off until it was a striped receiver. Wouldn't that make it technically "pistol lower" as I bought it was a legit pistol.

That is the point I was trying to say. You can still have a "pistol lower"

Any dealer who receives that stripped lower would record it in his bound book as exactly as I describe above:
Section A as a "Receiver"
Question 24 as "Other firearm"

It would be the same whether it was a used Remington 700 receiver or even a barreled Rem 700 receiver........if it doesn't have a shoulder stock it is not a rifle.


Completely separate is the legality of assembling a firearm from a receiver that was originally a rifle or pistol. Thats where ATF Ruling 2011-4 applies.
If you disassembled an AR15 rifle, sold the stripped receiver to someone in another state, the receiving dealer in that state would record that lower as "receiver" in his bound book and as "receiver" and "Other firearm" on the Form 4473. Not as "rifle receiver" because there is no such definition in federal law or ATF regs.
For sure, the buyer of your stripped lower could only assemble that lower into a rifle....because of Ruling 2011-4.

If you disassembled an AR15 pistol, sold the stripped receiver to someone in another state, the receiving dealer in that state would record that lower as "receiver" in his bound book and as "receiver" and "Other firearm" on the Form 4473. Not as "pistol receiver" because there is no such definition in federal law or ATF regs.
You buyer could lawfully assemble that lower into either a pistol or rifle...because of Ruling 2011-4.

When I received my FFL in 2008, this was a question I asked my IOI: "How do I know what that used AR lower was before I got it?" He said "Record the firearm type in front of you, just like the regs describe."

 

[Robbins290]

No, you can't.
A stripped lower does not meet the definition of "pistol" in ATF regulations. Any dealer that ignores the clear instructions on the Form 4473 runs the risk of losing his FFL.

Question 24. Category of Firearm(s): “Other” refers to frames, receivers, and
other firearms that are neither handguns nor long guns (rifles or shotguns), such as
firearms having a pistol grip that expel a shotgun shell, or National Firearms Act
(NFA) firearms, including silencers. If a frame or receiver can only be made into a
long gun (rifle or shotgun), it is still a frame or receiver, not a handgun or long gun.
All frames and receivers are “firearms” by definition, and subject to the same GCA
limitations. See 18 U.S.C § 921(a)(3)(B). 18 U.S.C. § 922(b)(1) makes it unlawful
for a licensee to sell any firearm other than a shotgun or rifle to any person under the
age of 21. Since a frame or receiver for a firearm, to include one that can only be
made into a long gun, is a “firearm other than a shotgun or rifle,” it cannot be transferred
to anyone under the age of 21, nor can these firearms be transferred to anyone
who is not a resident of the State where the transfer is to take place. Also, note that
multiple sales forms are not required for frames or receivers of any firearms, or pistol
grip shotguns, since they are not “pistols or revolvers” under 18 U.S.C.§ 923(g)(3)(A).



No.
If you have this

It's recorded in Section A of the form 4473 as "Receiver" and on Question 24 as "Other firearm"......exactly as described in the instructions.





Any dealer who receives that stripped lower would record it in his bound book as exactly as I describe above:
Section A as a "Receiver"
Question 24 as "Other firearm"

It would be the same whether it was a used Remington 700 receiver or even a barreled Rem 700 receiver........if it doesn't have a shoulder stock it is not a rifle.


Completely separate is the legality of assembling a firearm from a receiver that was originally a rifle or pistol. Thats where ATF Ruling 2011-4 applies.
If you disassembled an AR15 rifle, sold the stripped receiver to someone in another state, the receiving dealer in that state would record that lower as "receiver" in his bound book and as "receiver" and "Other firearm" on the Form 4473. Not as "rifle receiver" because there is no such definition in federal law or ATF regs.
For sure, the buyer of your stripped lower could only assemble that lower into a rifle....because of Ruling 2011-4.

If you disassembled an AR15 pistol, sold the stripped receiver to someone in another state, the receiving dealer in that state would record that lower as "receiver" in his bound book and as "receiver" and "Other firearm" on the Form 4473. Not as "pistol receiver" because there is no such definition in federal law or ATF regs.
You buyer could lawfully assemble that lower into either a pistol or rifle...because of Ruling 2011-4.

When I received my FFL in 2008, this was a question I asked my IOI: "How do I know what that used AR lower was before I got it?" He said "Record the firearm type in front of you, just like the regs describe."

Did you see the link I sent? Its not a stripped lower, Its a complete firearm, NOT A STRIPPED RECEIVER. So wouldn't the 4473 be a "pistol"?

Least according to this article.

Handgun Vs AR Pistol: What’s the difference? | CrossBreed Blog

CrossBreed Blog | Home Defense | Handgun Vs AR Pistol: What’s the difference?

www.crossbreedholsters.com

 

[KY DAN]

So is it legal or not as of today 2025?

That is all I wanted to know

Palmettostatearmory.com has pistols with braces for sale.


Can I buy one from them?

 

[dogtown tom]

Did you see the link I sent? Its not a stripped lower, Its a complete firearm, NOT A STRIPPED RECEIVER. So wouldn't the 4473 be a "pistol"?

Of course I did.
But you wrote: "...... and I took all the parts off until it was a striped receiver....."
Again, transfer that stripped receiver and the dealer records it as a receiver, not a pistol.
A stripped receiver is not a handgun or a long gun until assembled as such.

Least according to this article.

Crossbreed Holsters might just be the last place one should look to for federal firearms definitions.

ATF and federal law are what you should read:
§ 478.11 Meaning of terms.

Pistol.
A weapon originally designed, made, and intended to fire a projectile (bullet) from one or more barrels when held in one hand, and having
(a) a chamber(s) as an integral part(s) of, or permanently aligned with, the bore(s); and
(b) a short stock designed to be gripped by one hand and at an angle to and extending below the line of the bore(s).
Firearm.
Any weapon, including a starter gun, which will or is designed to or may readily be converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive; the frame or receiver of any such weapon; any firearm muffler or firearm silencer; or any destructive device; but the term shall not include an antique firearm. In the case of a licensed collector, the term shall mean only curios and relics. The term shall include a weapon parts kit that is designed to or may readily be completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive. The term shall not include a weapon, including a weapon parts kit, in which the frame or receiver of such weapon is destroyed as described in the definition “frame or receiver”.

A stripped lower does not meet the definition of "pistol" or "rifle", but it does meet the definition of "firearm".

 

[dogtown tom]

So is it legal or not as of today 2025?

That is all I wanted to know

Palmettostatearmory.com has pistols with braces for sale.


Can I buy one from them?

Of course you can, for all the reason already given above.