If approved to lead the agency, Dettelbach claimed he would “use the tools Congress gives me” and pledged to be a “fair regulator.” After the first Biden nominee was scuttled, he passed muster and took control of the ATF.
Now it appears that the days of leaving legislation to lawmakers are behind the director.
Dettelbach was recently the keynote speaker at a Harvard University gathering, and he delivered a far different agenda to what was undoubtedly a receptive audience. Instead of being the point man for congressional laws concerning Second Amendment rights, he radically shifted into the far different role of a gun control lobbyist.
The director told the “Gun Violence in America” meeting that he concurred with the anti-gun lobby in their call for a ban on semiautomatic weapons, popularly referred to as modern sporting rifles (MSRs). He also threw his weight as ATF director behind implementing universal background checks.
This represented a sharp turn from his testimony to Congress.
Seeking approval to lead the ATF, Dettelbach steadfastly claimed that he would respect the principle of separation of powers and leave legislating up to Congress. In other words, he would apply the law of the land, not turn into a lobbyist pushing for new ones.
Despite the wishes of virtually every executive branch in the nation’s gloried history, Congress writes laws. It’s that simple.
Dettelbach gave all appearances of understanding this distinction when questioned by lawmakers. Interestingly, he stubbornly refused when asked to give his definition of a so-called “assault rifle.” This nebulous term, he explained, was only to be defined by Congress.
Answering a direct question from Sen. Tom Cotton (R-AR), the nominee referred to when he was a political candidate in Ohio and supported bans on semiautomatic firearms.
Dettelbach confirmed that he did indeed campaign against these weapons but asserted that defining them is under congressional authority.
“I did talk about restrictions on assault weapons. I did not define the term, and I haven’t gone through the process of defining the term. That would only be for the Congress if it chose to take that up to do.”
That answer, of course, was delivered to what were unquestionably some skeptical senators in the room who could hold up his nomination.
Flash forward to the recent gathering at Harvard University, and a far different song was sung by the ATF director.
Dettelbach told the group, in a first for an individual in his position, “The president has also said, and I agree, that we should consider and reinstate a ban on certain types of assault weapons.”
He attempted to deflect to Congress’ authority by saying it is in their purview to decide what such a weapon is, but this is disingenuous. He knows well that lawmakers have not done this since 1994, and broad support for such a measure is just not there.
Since the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban expired ten years later, legislators have had numerous opportunities to deliver similar measures to the president. Both parties have controlled Congress at different times, and neither took the opportunity to define an “assault weapon” and pass such a bill when it was well within their power.
There are currently over 24 million MSRs in circulation in the U.S., and the AR-15-style rifles are entrenched as the most popular long guns in the nation.
For Dettelbach to call for such a ban is a slap in the face to millions of law-abiding Americans and their Second Amendment rights.
However, the audience the ATF director spoke to wanted to hear a particular message, and it was dutifully delivered.
