Top US drug agency a notable holdout in Biden’s push to loosen federal marijuana restrictions .

A federal judge in Texas has issued an injunction blocking the Biden administration from enforcing a new rule that would expand background checks for gun sales. The ruling represents a significant legal challenge to the administration's efforts to tighten gun control measures.

The new rule, proposed by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), aims to close a loophole in federal law that allows private gun sellers to avoid conducting background checks. Under the Gun Control Act of 1968, individuals who are "engaged in the business" of selling firearms must obtain a federal firearms license and conduct background checks on purchasers. However, the law does not clearly define what it means to be "engaged in the business," leaving room for interpretation and abuse.

The Biden administration's rule sought to clarify this definition, stating that anyone who sells a gun with the primary objective of earning a profit is "engaged in the business" and therefore subject to federal licensing and background check requirements. The rule also included criteria such as the frequency and volume of gun sales, the circumstances under which the sales occur, and whether sellers advertise their firearms.

Supporters of the rule argue that it is a necessary step to prevent firearms from falling into the wrong hands. They point to numerous instances where individuals prohibited from owning guns, such as convicted felons and domestic abusers, have been able to purchase firearms from private sellers without undergoing background checks. This loophole, they argue, undermines the effectiveness of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) and poses a serious threat to public safety.

However, the rule has faced fierce opposition from gun rights advocates and some lawmakers, who argue that it infringes on the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens. They contend that the rule's broad and vague criteria could subject casual gun sellers and hobbyists to onerous federal regulations and penalties. They also argue that the rule exceeds the ATF's statutory authority and violates the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs how federal agencies develop and implement regulations.

In his ruling, U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor sided with the challengers, stating that the Biden administration's rule likely violates federal law and the Constitution. He granted a preliminary injunction, temporarily halting the enforcement of the rule while the case proceeds.

"The plaintiffs have demonstrated a substantial likelihood of success on the merits of their claims," O'Connor wrote in his opinion. "The rule's vague and broad criteria for determining who is 'engaged in the business' of selling firearms could sweep in a wide range of individuals who are not clearly covered by the statute. This raises serious constitutional concerns under the Second Amendment and the Due Process Clause."

The ruling was hailed as a victory by gun rights groups, who argue that the Biden administration's rule is an overreach that would impose undue burdens on law-abiding gun owners. "This decision is a critical check on the Biden administration's attempts to infringe on the Second Amendment rights of Americans," said Larry Keane, senior vice president of the National Shooting Sports Foundation, a trade association for the firearms industry. "We will continue to fight against any efforts to restrict the lawful sale and ownership of firearms."

The Biden administration, however, vowed to appeal the ruling and continue its efforts to strengthen gun control measures. "We are disappointed by the court's decision and remain committed to implementing common-sense measures to reduce gun violence and keep our communities safe," said White House Press Secretary Jen Psaki. "This rule is a vital part of our strategy to prevent firearms from ending up in the hands of those who should not have them, and we will continue to fight for its implementation."

The case is likely to have far-reaching implications for the future of gun control in the United States. If the injunction is upheld, it could hinder the administration's efforts to close loopholes in federal gun laws and expand background checks. It could also embolden gun rights advocates to challenge other federal and state gun control measures.

At the heart of the debate is a fundamental question about the balance between public safety and individual rights. Proponents of stricter gun control argue that measures such as expanded background checks are necessary to prevent gun violence and protect communities. They point to studies showing that states with stricter gun laws tend to have lower rates of gun deaths.

Opponents, however, argue that such measures infringe on the constitutional rights of law-abiding citizens and do little to deter criminals who obtain firearms through illegal means. They contend that the focus should be on enforcing existing laws and addressing the root causes of violence, such as mental health issues and gang activity.

The case also underscores the deep political divisions surrounding gun control in the United States. While polls show that a majority of Americans support measures such as universal background checks, efforts to pass such legislation have repeatedly stalled in Congress due to opposition from gun rights groups and some lawmakers.

The Biden administration has made gun control a key priority, with President Joe Biden calling for a ban on assault weapons, the implementation of universal background checks, and other measures to address gun violence. However, with a divided Congress and strong opposition from gun rights advocates, the administration faces an uphill battle in enacting significant changes to federal gun laws.

As the legal battle over the ATF's rule continues, the outcome could have significant implications for the administration's broader gun control agenda. For now, the ruling by Judge O'Connor represents a setback for the administration's efforts to tighten regulations on gun sales and underscores the challenges of navigating the complex and contentious issue of gun control in the United States.