Trump DOJ Reverses Ban on Rapid-Fire Gun Triggers/ Newslooks/ WASHINGTON/ J. Mansour/ Morning Edition/ The Justice Department has lifted a federal ban on forced-reset triggers, aftermarket devices that increase the firing speed of semi-automatic rifles. The decision, part of a settlement with Rare Breed Triggers, also mandates the return of seized devices. Gun control advocates warn the move will escalate gun violence.
Forced-Reset Trigger Settlement: Quick Looks
- DOJ lifts ban on forced-reset triggers under new Trump administration.
- Settlement ends legal battle between Rare Breed Triggers and the federal government.
- Devices had previously been classified as machine guns by ATF.
- Agreement requires ATF to return seized and surrendered triggers.
- Rare Breed Triggers agrees not to develop similar handgun devices.
- Gun control groups condemn the move, calling it a threat to public safety.
- Settlement signals broader rollback of Biden-era gun regulations.
- Trump’s White House counsel previously represented Rare Breed Triggers.
- ATF accused of government overreach by pro-gun advocates.
- Gun reform advocates say ruling could lead to more firearm deaths.
Trump DOJ Reverses Ban on Rapid-Fire Gun Triggers
Deep Look
DOJ Settlement Legalizes Forced-Reset Triggers, Sparking Gun Control Concerns
WASHINGTON, D.C. — In a sharp reversal of federal gun policy, the U.S. Justice Department under the Trump administration has ended its ban on forced-reset triggers, aftermarket components that enable semi-automatic rifles to fire at rapid speeds. The decision was announced Friday as part of a sweeping settlement with Rare Breed Triggers, a Florida-based company that manufactures the controversial devices.
The deal not only lifts the ban but also compels the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to return thousands of seized or voluntarily surrendered triggers. Gun control advocates were quick to condemn the settlement, arguing it effectively legalizes devices that mimic the functionality of machine guns.
A New Direction on Gun Policy
“This Department of Justice believes that the Second Amendment is not a second-class right,” Attorney General Pam Bondi said in a statement released Friday, underscoring the administration’s broader goal of rolling back gun regulations enacted during President Biden’s term.
The agreement marks a dramatic shift from the prior administration’s legal position. Under Biden, the federal government had maintained that forced-reset triggers violated the National Firearms Act because they allowed rifles to fire multiple rounds with a single continuous trigger pull, essentially converting them into machine guns.
A Legal Battle Ends in Reversal
The years-long dispute culminated in the lawsuit brought by Rare Breed Triggers, which challenged the ATF’s classification of its products. Represented in the past by David Warrington — now serving as Trump’s White House counsel — the company argued that the devices required individual trigger pulls for each shot, remaining within legal boundaries.
“This victory is a landmark moment in the fight against unchecked government overreach,” said Lawrence DeMonico, president of Rare Breed Triggers. “The ATF and DOJ tried to silence and bury us not because we broke the law, but because I refused to bend to the will of a tyrannical administration.”
Under the terms of the agreement, Rare Breed Triggers also agreed not to develop forced-reset devices intended for handguns — a key limitation highlighted by the Justice Department to defend the scope of the settlement.
Gun Control Advocates Sound the Alarm
Gun control organizations voiced alarm at what they see as a dangerous precedent. Vanessa Gonzalez, vice president at GIFFORDS, called the decision a devastating step backward.
“The Trump administration has just effectively legalized machine guns,” Gonzalez said. “Lives will be lost because of this action.”
Gun safety advocates argue that forced-reset triggers pose the same threat to public safety as bump stocks, which were banned in 2019 following their use in the deadly Las Vegas mass shooting. Critics worry this settlement could pave the way for other devices that skirt the edges of current gun law to return to legal circulation.
Political and Legal Implications
The decision sends a strong signal about the Trump administration’s commitment to loosening firearm regulations. It also casts a spotlight on ongoing tensions between gun rights supporters and federal agencies like the ATF, long accused by Second Amendment groups of regulatory overreach.
The return of seized devices and the reversal of a ban could have lasting legal and political implications, particularly as lawmakers on both sides of the aisle prepare for renewed debate over gun control measures ahead of the 2026 midterm elections.
Though no laws were changed, the agreement reinterprets enforcement policy in a way that significantly weakens existing restrictions. Legal analysts say this could embolden manufacturers and trigger new lawsuits challenging firearm-related rules instituted in recent years.
You must Register or Login to post a comment.