By Tanya Metaksa
What’s New—Trump Administration Reverses Biden policy; President Trump and SCOTUS—Noem v. National TPS Alliance-A ruling supporting Trump’s revoking TPS status; Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt on Second Amendment rights; USA Today reports on Everytown’s new firearms training program; Government Shutdown; North Carolina: The veto override vote of SB50 has been rescheduled for October 20, 2025. The votes for the override are shaky. Pennsylvania: As we discussed in the previous Grassroots Update, four anti-Second Amendment bills were on the House floor last week—3 wins, one loss for the Second Amendment; U.S. Virgin Islands: Bill No. 36-0144, a proposal to make significant changes to gun laws in the U.S. Virgin Islands, is currently scheduled for a hearing before the Committee on Rules and Judiciary .on Oct. 9.
Trump Administration Reverses Biden policy
President Donald Trump has reversed a major Biden-era regulation prohibiting the export of civilian firearms to foreign countries. This is a significant victory for the Second Amendment, the American gun industry, and related economic interests. Mark Smith of the Four Boxes Diner channel, a noted constitutional attorney and Second Amendment scholar, published a YouTube video that describes the context, legal implications, and industry impact of this Trump rollback of Biden’s regulation.
Background & Biden’s Firearms Export Ban
After taking office in 2024, President Biden’s administration implemented strict regulations that effectively shuttered American gun companies’ ability to export civilian firearms and ammunition to overseas markets.
Biden’s political purpose was to damage both small and large manufacturers by depriving them of global revenue streams, which made it difficult for exports to remain profitable. Regulations included requiring manufacturers to apply for export licenses annually (rather than the previous cycle of every four or five years), while simultaneously increasing the bureaucratic burden and adding legal costs. As a result, time, money, and resources were diverted from productive business activities toward compliance, legal fees, and endless paperwork.
We are aware that this was not about national security, but rather about stifling the gun industry’s financial health and global reach, making firearms more expensive for American consumers and threatening industry sustainability. Thus, Biden’s actions undermined the practical exercise of the Second Amendment—the health and availability of the firearms industry.
Trump’s Regulatory Reversal
President Trump’s reversal, announced shortly after key administration posts were filled (Pam Bondi as Attorney General, John Sauer as Solicitor General, and Harmeet Dhillon as head of the Civil Rights Division), restores the previous regulatory framework from his first term. The Executive Branch, particularly the Department of Commerce and the Bureau of Industry and Security (BIS), meticulously unwound the Biden regulations through a thorough, legally compliant process. The resulting government document exceeds 120 pages, reflecting an intensive internal analysis, stakeholder comment review, and adherence to proper rulemaking standards—a necessary approach to defend against inevitable legal challenges from anti-gun groups.
The restored rules allow U.S. manufacturers to compete globally, reopening hundreds of millions of dollars in export revenue for civilian firearms makers. Most pistols, rifles, and non-long-barreled shotguns will still require worldwide export licenses; however, the paperwork is streamlined and consistent with typical BIS practices. BIS and its interagency partners will continue screening applications to prevent firearms from reaching criminal actors, balancing export opportunities with safety concerns.
It is essential to note that this regulatory change only affects civilian firearms, not military-grade equipment, which is governed by ITAR regulations overseen by the State Department. The reversed export controls fall under the Department of Commerce’s Export Administration Regulations—crucial for civilian markets, such as gun clubs, sports shooters, hunters, and collectors abroad. The scope makes clear that the rollback is about supporting lawful civilian commerce, not international arms trafficking.
Process Compliance and Legal Strategy
Lessons from Trump’s first term—such as the failed initiative to include a citizenship question in the census—underscore how skipping steps or legal requirements can doom executive action in court. The Trump administration intentionally took its time to “dot the i’s and cross the t’s” to protect any reversal from courtroom challenges and ensure lasting impact.
Impact on the Second Amendment Community & Industry
This regulatory reversal is a win not only for gun rights but also for American workers, small businesses, and manufacturing employees whose livelihoods depend on the U.S. firearms industry’s vitality. This executive order is a pro-business measure that supports both constitutional rights and the broader economy. Smith characterizes Biden’s original order as antithetical to American capitalism and worker prosperity.
In summary, Trump’s rollback of Biden’s firearms export ban represents a calculated, legally defensible step toward strengthening the American gun industry, protecting U.S. citizens’ Second Amendment rights, and bolstering the U.S. economy.
President Trump and SCOTUS
The President has been successful at the Supreme Court when lower courts attempt to limit his constitutional presidential powers. On Oct. 3, in the case before the U.S. Supreme Court regarding the immigration status of Venezuelans—Noem v. National TPS Alliance—SCOTUS intervened again, supporting the Trump administration’s efforts to revoke Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for hundreds of thousands of Venezuelan nationals. This humanitarian program was initially designated under the Biden administration in 2021 and extended in 2023 due to instability in Venezuela. In February 2025, Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem terminated the TPS designation and extension, prompting a lawsuit by the National TPS Alliance and individual Venezuelan TPS holders in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (case No. 3:25-cv-01766). District Judge Edward Chen ruled against the termination, finding it violated federal law and was based on discriminatory stereotypes. However, the Supreme Court intervened twice—first in May 2025 to stay a preliminary order and again on October 3, 2025, to stay Chen’s final ruling—allowing the revocation to proceed pending further litigation. This affects over 300,000 Venezuelans, exposing them to potential deportation.
President Trump’s Press Secretary explains Trump’s Second Amendment policies
In an October video on The Four Boxes channel on YouTube, attorney Mark W. Smith discusses Karoline Levitt’s presentation of Trump’s gun policy. The discussion is prompted by a rare direct question in the White House press room about Trump’s position on gun policy, red flag laws, and actions to tackle gun violence and enhance public safety. He covers the following topics.
Red Flag Laws Versus Civil Commitment
Smith analyzes Leavitt’s remarks, placing them within the broader legal context. He observes that Leavitt avoids explicitly endorsing red flag laws—laws that let courts temporarily seize firearms from individuals deemed a risk—and she does not state that Trump supports them. Instead, the administration emphasizes identifying people with severe mental health issues and ensuring they get necessary help, mainly through civil commitment processes rather than gun-specific policies. Smith traces the history of mental health policy in America, arguing that the deinstitutionalization movement since the late 1970s has led to more homelessness and an increase in untreated mental illness in public spaces.
The host sharply distinguishes between longstanding civil commitment laws and modern red flag statutes. He argues that civil commitment laws, which permit the involuntary institutionalization of mentally ill individuals who pose a danger, have existed in every state for decades and include significant due process protections—requiring clear and convincing evidence and legal representation for the accused. Red flag laws, in his view, are designed as a workaround to these safeguards, making it easier to restrict the rights of gun owners based on allegations rather than solid judicial procedures.
Critique of Red Flag Laws
Smith’s core critique is that red flag laws target gun owners, bypassing the stronger due process requirements of civil commitment processes. He argues that if someone is truly too dangerous to possess firearms, then they are too risky to be at liberty in society at all, regardless of weapon access. Therefore, existing civil commitment procedures provide a sufficient public safety tool without eroding constitutional rights. Smith maintains that red flag laws are politically motivated tools aimed at gun ownership rather than genuine public safety measures, noting they do not apply to people who do not own firearms or to myriad other potential dangers.
Trump Administration’s Second Amendment Track Record
Smith concludes by praising the Trump administration for its strong support of gun rights. He mentions the administration’s legal actions against assault weapon and magazine bans in states like Illinois and New Jersey, and its refusal to enforce certain gun restrictions in Washington, D.C. He also points out the administration’s encouragement for the Supreme Court to resolve restrictive carry laws in major appellate cases. Smith finishes by stating that both the administration’s public statements and actions show a firm commitment to the Second Amendment, making Trump’s team one of the most pro-gun rights administrations in American history.
The video presents Leavitt’s White House remarks and the Trump administration’s actions as aligned, nuanced, and carefully protective of gun rights, while supporting strong yet traditional public safety measures for genuinely dangerous individuals.
USA Today reports on Everytown’s new firearms training program
According to the article, the new “firearms training” program called Train SMART, “met with stiff opposition from [Everytown’s] own members and longtime supporters.” The article quotes Sandy Phillips, a long-time anti-firearms activist from Colorado.
The article described her reaction to this announcement:
Violence prevention members ‘shocked’ at decision
“In addition to mockery from gun groups, the program met stiff opposition from its own members and longtime supporters.
“For Sandy Phillips, the training is offensive. Phillips, whose daughter Jessica Ghawi, 24, was killed in the Aurora, Colorado, movie theater attack in 2012, has long battled firearms and ammunition manufacturers, even going bankrupt after losing a lawsuit against the companies that sold ammunition, tear gas, and body armor to their daughter’s killer.
“What they’re doing is so hurtful and so insulting to survivors. It’s like ‘oh my God, how could any survivor continue to support them?'” Phillips told USA TODAY. “People are hurt and confused. Our mission is to reduce gun violence and keep people from having guns in their homes, and here you are giving a gun safety class that encourages gun ownership. You can’t have it both ways.”
Government Shutdown
As of Oct. 6, the federal government shutdown remains in effect. Last Friday, the Senate voted to end the shutdown, but the motion failed with a 54-44 vote. To lift the shutdown, the Senate needs a two-thirds majority, or 60 votes, in favor.
State Legislature
The following states are still in SESSION:
California, Massachusetts, Michigan, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Wisconsin
North Carolina: The veto override vote of SB50 has been rescheduled for Oct. 20, 2025. The votes for the override are shaky.
Pennsylvania: As we discussed in the previous Grassroots Update, four anti-Second Amendment bills were on the House floor last week. Votes were held on four of those bills. Three bills failed by one vote 101 102: HB1099, the so-called “ghost-gun” bill, failed by one vote; HB1859, which would create emergency protection orders, and HB1866, the bill banning “machine gun conversion devices. Unfortunately, HB1593 would require state-run universal background checks. Although every dealer transaction in the country already must pass a background check. The bill passed the House with a vote of 104-99.
U.S. Virgin Islands: Bill No. 36-0144, a proposal to make significant changes to gun laws in the U.S. Virgin Islands, is currently scheduled for a hearing before the Committee on Rules and Judiciary.on October 9, 2025,
