Privacy Protections & the Second Amendment: Examining ATF’s Relationship to the Tiahrt Amendment

on federal law enforcement will come to order. Welcome everyone, we welcome our audience. We ask that you observe all all uh principles of polite decorum today, but we are happy to have you here. Without objection, the cl- the chair may declare recess at any time. I recognize myself for the purpose of making an opening statement. Today, the Subcommittee on Federal Law Enforcement convenes to conduct critical oversight of the agency charged with executing our nation's firearms laws, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, or ATF. We are honored to be joined by ATF's newly confirmed director, Robert Sacata. Director Sacata has decades of experience and distinguished service within ATF and law enforcement. Director Sacata's deep expertise and his respect for the law and constitutional rights should give us optimism about ATF's future posture toward law-abiding gun owners and the second amendment. Strong principled leadership at ATF is all the more important now, given the agency's troubling disregard of second amendment rights over the past several years. One prominent example has been ATF's repeated failure to abide by a federal law prohibiting the dissemination of firearms trace data, known popularly as the Tierhart amendments. Firearms trace data is information about the chain of gun ownership and sale, beginning from point of manufacture, maintained by the ATF's National Tracing Center, or NTC. Part of a two thousand and three Department of Justice appropriations bill, the Tierhardt amendments precludes ATF from sharing this data with anyone other than prosecutors or law enforcement agencies in connection with criminal investigations. The purpose of this law is clear. Failure to abide by the Tier hard amendment exposes informants, undercover officers, and lawful federal firearm licensees, or FFLs, whose safety could be endangered by revelations in violation of Tia Hart. Despite Tia Hart's obvious importance to police and public safety, recent history has shown that ATF has sometimes disregarded the law. Some violations of Tia Hart have seemed unintentional, associated with accidental data disclosures while responding to FOIA requests. However, Other violations clearly stem from the political and ideological opposition that some ATF bureaucrats have for the Tierhart Law. There are several glaring recent examples, particularly during the Biden administration. To begin, the Biden ATF assisted gun control groups in creating a map of gun shops including those owned by some members of Congress, by providing tear-heart protected data as part of a FOIA request. That's how this map was created. ATF's release of this data was a clear violation of federal law and seemed intended to help anti-second amendment groups. Separately, the Biden ATF inadvertently disseminated tear-heart protected data as part of a F- FOIA request from the Group Gun Owners of America, also known as GOA. ATF subsequently secured a gag order to prevent GOA from sharing the data. GOA, supported by several First Amendment groups, sued to retain access to the data by virtue of First Amendment press freedoms. Dishearteningly, This disregard for the law has not been limited to the Biden administration. After the Biden ATF's inadvertent disclosure of TI-heart protected trace data to GOA, the DOJ, under Pam Bondi, re-released that same data, possibly purposefully to make moot GOA's ongoing litigation against the ATF gag order. So rather than protecting the public by preventing sensitive firearms trace data from falling into the wrong hands, the ATF has defied both the letter and the spirit of the law. ATF's approach to TIHART can serve as a window into the agency's successes and failures, upholding the second amendment and ensuring protections on sensitive law enforcement data. The Biden administration in particular took a variety of troubling actions in this regard. Under President Biden, ATF's quote-unquote " zero tolerance" enforcement policy, which threatened to close firearm businesses over even small non-material paperwork and clerical errors, increased reliance on inspection records, and compliance data to revoke firearms licenses. The Biden administration ATF used bureaucratic complexities to prey upon legally operating firearms dealers and license holders. Furthermore, Biden-era regulatory changes and enforcement guidance expanded who is considered quote-unquote engaged in the business of dealing firearms, potentially implicating unsuspecting everyday Americans as federally regulated gun dealers and subjecting them to severe penalties for non-compliance, including criminal prosecution. I have faith that the current administration will continue to roll back the Biden ATF's most destructive regulations. A recently announced batch of ATF proposed rulemakings seemed to do just that, and I encourage that action. However, ATF's improper treatment of tear-heart protected data demonstrates that rigorous ongoing congressional oversight of the agency is necessary regardless of which party controls the White House. I thank you, my friend, Director Sacata, for joining us today to discuss this crucial subject, along with other second amendment issues. I look forward to today's hearing. I now recognize a ranking member of the subcommittee, Miss Summer Lee of Pennsylvania, for the purpose of making an opening statement.

Thank you, Mister Chair, and I also look forward to and excited to have a hearing existing. Um, I do have to wonder though what it will take to actually get my Republican colleagues to take action to prevent gun violence. Because Columbine wasn't enough, and Sandy Hook wasn't enough, and Las Vegas wasn't enough, and Parkland wasn't enough, and the Pulse nightclub wasn't enough. Um, even your president, uh, being shot at multiple different times wasn't enough. Last year, according to a tracker by Everytown, there were thirty-eight thousand, three hundred and sixty-eight incidents of gun violence in the United States. resulting in thirteen thousand nine hundred and twenty-six deaths, twenty-one thousand six hundred and eighty-six injuries. Gun violence remains the leading cause of death for children in the United States of America. Mister Chair, your home state of Louisiana has the highest gun violence death rate. Just last month, there was a mass shooting at a mall in Baton Rouge and another shooting in Shreveport where eight children were killed. Yet, this hearing with the new director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives isn't about reducing gun violence. It's about privacy protections for gun dealers. Trump and Republicans have shown again and again that they do not care about this epidemic of gun violence. After a shooting, they at most post online thoughts and prayers, and then they go back to vehemently defending the Second Amendment. Uh, sometimes they even mock these tragedies by wearing little assault gun rifle pins. Uh, eighteen days after he took office, President Trump signed an executive order on protecting second amendment rights, which seems to be the only constitutional right that they care about. Falling in line with this executive order, Director Cicada recently announced new rules, none of which do anything to reduce gun violence. Among these proposed changes are a narrowing of the engaged uh in business rule, which generally ensures that for-profit gun sailors must obtain a federal firearms license. He has also moved to deregulate bump stocks, like the one used in the two thousand seventeen Las Vegas mass shooting that led to sixty deaths. Trump and Republicans aren't just making sure gun dealers and owners remain unregulated and unburdened. He has also attacked efforts to get to the root causes of gun violence. Trump closed the Office of Gun Violence Prevention, which helped hundreds of Americans in countless communities by offering the first ever federal response to mass shootings and gun violence. It responded to crises when they happened and connected local governments and municipalities with resources to help victims and survivors. Last year, the DOJ also abruptly terminated about fif- five hundred, excuse me, five hundred million in federal grants to more than two hundred organizations and local governments working on community safety and justice issues. One of the things is these organizations do is work to combat street violence, and connect people with mental health services. And they get results. Studies have shown that community violence intervention programs reduce violence in communities and have contributed to lowering homicide rates. It's why I launched a community safety caucus to prioritize this work. Real community safety means making holistic investments and people to root out the systemic challenges that perpetuate this cycle of harm. Yet, due to Trump's policies, many of these organizations doing this crucial work have had to roll back services, or have had to close entirely. So under this administration, you can't regulate guns, and you can't have programs that address the violence in other ways. And you can't say that the money isn't there. Surely, we can take some of the one billion dollars in propo- propose for the Trump ballroom bunker and put it towards some of these violence reduction programs. Republicans wanna control what books you read, what history you learn, how you identify, who you can love, our bodies. They wanna control everything except the very thing that could prevent deaths of children and students and worshipers and shoppers in the only country on Earth, where this is a problem. It seems that they think those thoughts and prayers do enough, but that we one of the most powerful body in this country can do no more. Uh, I thank you and I yield back.

The gentlelady yields without objection representatives Eric Burleson of Missouri, Michael Cloud of Texas, Andrew Clyde of Georgia, and Eli Crane of Arizona and Maxwell Frost of Florida are waived onto the subcommittee for the purpose of questioning the witness at today's hearings. I'm pleased to welcome today's witness. Robert Sicotta is the Director of Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives. Confirmed by the Senate on April twenty ninth, Director Sicotta brings with him over three decades of law enforcement and public service experience. Mister Sagata's law enforcement career began with the New York City Police Department, where he served from nineteen ninety-two to two thousand. He joined ATF as a special agent in two thousand and five in the Baltimore field division. His successes in a variety of field assignments led to his promotion to ATF headquarters, where he has served in multiple senior leadership positions prior to his appointment as director. Most recently, he served as deputy director beginning in April of twenty twenty five. I personally welcome director Sacata for being here, and I'd like to note that the gentleman made me a promise few months ago that he would appear before this committee. Uh, it's his first available day on his calendar after confirmation. He called me immediately after confirmation, very quickly, and - and advised me he intended to honor that promise, and here he sits today. Thank you for honoring your word, Mr. Sekata. Pursuant to Committee Rule nine G, the witness will please stand and raise your right hand, sir. Do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony that you are about to give is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? So help you God. Let the record show that the witness answered in the affirmative. Thank you, sir. You may take a seat. We appreciate you being here today, and I look forward to your testimony. We all do. Let me remind the witness that we have read your written statement and it will appear in full in the hearing record. Please limit your oral statement to five minutes, sir. As a reminder, please press the button on the microphone in front of you so that it is on and members can hear you. When you begin to speak, the light in front of you will turn green, after four minutes it'll turn yellow. When the red light comes on, your five minutes has expired. We ask you, you p- you please wrap up at that point. I now recognize Director Ciccata. for his opening statement.

Thank you, sir. Good morning, Chairman Higgins, Ranking Member Lee, and members of the subcommittee. Thank you for the invitation to appear before you to discuss privacy protections and the second amendment. ATF is the only federal law enforcement agency whose primary mission is combating violent crime. We arrest violent criminals, disrupt firearm trafficking networks that arm gangs and cartels, investigate bombings and arson, and deliver world-class forensic and intelligence services to state and local partners all while protecting the second amendment and all rights of law abiding Americans. We are a small federal agency with roughly four thousand six hundred employees, but we are mighty and our actions speak for themselves. Since January twentieth, twenty twenty five, ATF has arrested just over eight thousand seven hundred criminals and seized nearly four forty-four thousand illegal firearms. approximately fifty-one hundred of which were being interdicted with the intention to traffic them to Mexico, just over two point seven million rounds of ammunition, and more than twenty-eight thousand three hundred illegal explosives. We've also made historic gains in E form processing. By the end of May, we will have processed many E form one and four applications in twenty twenty six as we did in the entirety of twenty twenty three. We have done all of this while cutting E form processing times forty seven days to forty two days and cutting E form processing times from two hundred and thirty days in twenty twenty three to just twelve days today. Although I know this is not an appropriations hearing, I would be remiss if I didn't point out that ATF's budget has suffered tremendously in the recent years. Congressional support for the president's fiscal year twenty twenty seven budget is therefore paramount to ensuring that ATF can continue to make gains in all these areas this subcommittee cares about. including tracing, ballistic evidence, and forensic laboratory examinations involving firearms, arson, and explosives, and reducing NFA E forms processing times. Given the compounded ATF cuts ATF has already absorbed, anything else would lead to catastrophic results in all of these efforts. The right to keep and bear arms is a constitutional guarantee, and ATF is committed to protecting and preserving it. As I said during my confirmation hearing, effective law enforcement and respect for civil liberties are inseparable obligations, and that is why ATF has entered a new era of reform to rebuild trust with the industry, the federal firearms licensees, lawful gun owners, and the public, while still prioritizing our efforts on public safety. Some of the specific actions I have taken include establishing a senior industry partnership advisor position to address industry concerns and foster pro- proactive engagement with the regulated community. revoking the enhanced regulatory enforcement policy, sometimes referred to as a zero tolerance policy, and replacing it with a new policy that emphasizes fairness and transparency, while recognizing that FFLs are often the first line of defense against car- gun crime. And I also implemented regulatory reforms last month, where ATF issued thirty-four notices of final and proposed rulemaking following the comprehensive review conducted in compliance with the executive order on protecting the second amendment rights. The aim is simpler, clearer regulations that do not compromise public safety. I encourage all of you and your constituents to submit comments on these proposed rules. We want to make sure that we get these right. ATF complies with all laws enacted by Congress. We do not have an illegal firearms registry, and we are committed to upholding the second amendment rights of law abiding citizens, protect their privacy, including and especially as it relates to the Teahart Amendment, the Demand Letter-Two program, amongst others. Firearms trace data exists to support criminal investigations, full stop. Any decision to share trace data with anyone for any reason requires explicit legal justification to my office for awareness. Under my leadership, that standard is firmly in place. To the extent that Congress wishes to strengthen these or any other privacy protections ATF and the Mister Chairman and members of the subcommittee, thank you again for the opportunity to appear before you today. ATF is a law enforcement agency in the truest sense. We enforce the law, we follow the law, and we protect the rights, the law guarantees. Through crime gun intelligence, forensic analysis, and relentless investigation, we identify and arrest violent offenders and gang members, dismantle trafficking networks, and sever the supply chains arming cartels, prohibited persons and terrorist organizations, all while safeguarding lawful commerce and upholding the constitution of the United States. Thank you again. I look forward to your questions.

I thank the gentleman for his opening statement. I recognize myself with five minutes for questioning. And Director Ciccata, we're gonna try to drill down in this in five minutes here, uh, regarding the tear-heart violations that that have been well documented in modern history, um, driven by for whatever purpose, accidentally or or purposefully by ATF. And and and perhaps we can concur, as you and I have discussed and others from your agency have discussed like the the root cause of of why this has happened and what Congress can do um driving more clarified stand alone legislation that uh that will enforce the understanding of the T heart policies that have been codified in in uh appropriations riders for many years but I think uh we can have more robust congressional action to more clearly lead not only your ATF, sir, but the ATF of the of generations yet to come. Um, so we're gonna talk about this, but with an agreed purpose that we're gonna continue to work together to address this, the tear-hard concern and ultimately fix it between Article-one authorities and Article-two concurrence. Is that correct? Does that sort of summarize our

Yes, sir.

Okay. So did eh we have established that the Tier hard amendments are fundamentally a n- it's a law protecting privacy, it's meant to protect law enforcement officers and the citizenry. Is that correct?

Uh, that's correct.

Okay. So on multiple occasions in recent years protected firearms trace data was disseminated in contravention of the Tia Hart amendment. This sometimes was done seemingly inadvertently and other times it appeared to be intentional. Do you think ATF has strategically utilized uh Freedom of Information Act requests, FOIA requests, and disclosure as a means of sidestepping Tia Hart?

Sir, I don't believe that uh I'm aware of any incident that it was done intentionally. I could I can tell you that uh for certain uh the one incident uh you mentioned uh that involved the gondolas of america uh that was an inadvertent mistake uh attributed to two things uh to be frank uh nonetheless uh a a problem and a big mistake it was attributed a uh to a lack of staffing and b, the software that we were using uh to redact uh information in effort to respond to FOIA uh the uh folks in our FOIA office uh in their review process selected the information set to be redacted and the system had a clunky way of finalizing those redactions and that was never done appropriately. No excuse. Uh, it was wrong. Uh, it we shouldn't have been released. Um, the uh the s- the second release involving that same response did involve the DOJ, and I won't speak uh on their behalf. Uh, but as far as what ATF did after that, we did uh purchase uh new software uh to to insure that we actually don't

Right.

have any sort of uh human error in the future.

So so you feel confident that based upon the the existing culture of compliance with tea heart and the examples that that you that under your leadership ATF accepts uh responsibility for and intends to learn from moving forward the You've been dealing with Tia Hart as a appropriations writer, unknown if it'd be renewed year by year. It's expected to be renewed, but until it's done, it's not done. So for twenty years, that's been the culture you've had to deal with, and we intend to - to pass permanent Tia Hart uh legislation, stand-alone legislation. Would that help like within the - the

the procedures and policies and cultures of the ATF to be more solid in compliance with Theart uh if I may sir I think uh uh ATF has I I can tell you for certain during my time and under my watch ATF uh completely respects Theart we will make sure there were no uh releases where there is a challenge and I look forward to working with this committee uh to help uh uh give Theart the uh tool the the the strength it needs to to protect the E-Trace data that we use in particular because that data, as you stated, is used to protect our communities. That's how our law enforcement officers or undercover operations, y- we use that information to identify and target violent criminals for our criminal investigations. That data is misused at times uh through uh different leadership uh in the local communities who compel our state and local partners to turn over that data. Uh the only mechanism ATF has uh to hold them accountable is to cut a particular law enforcement off of uh E-Trace. That is not a good solution for us. It's it's tough for us when that's the only option because if I cut that law enforcement agency off of E-Trace, I'm also thereby putting public safety at risk because that same police department is not not able to conduct uh their investigative.

Well we wanna work with you to to stabilize that that process and ATF policies. Uh we're gonna deliver you a more permanent fix there, sir. Uh without objection, I'd like unanimous consent to enter into the record a letter from my office uh to the ATF dated January twenty eighth of this year. Uh in reference to this topic, another letter from my office to to Director Sicotta. Um Deputy Director at the time dated April sixth, twenty twenty six and a response from the

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um,

Thank you.

I would like to start by acknowledging the eight children who were shot and killed recently, in the first of two horrific mass shootings in Louisiana. One of them was only three years old. children should face this kind of or should not face this kind of violence. They should not have to learn active shooter drills at schools. They shouldn't have to uh worry about any of this. They should uh be living and playing and just being kids. I represent Western Pennsylvania, which includes communities that are still healing from the Pittsburgh synagogue shooting, the deadliest anti-semitic attack in American history. In my district, gun violence is not abstract. It is mass shootings, hate fueled violence, and the daily community violence that devastates families. One of the few agencies tasked with helping reduce gun violence is the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the ATF. So I want to start with debunking some myths about the basic tools used by ATF. Central to all of this, gun tracing. Director Cicada, could you briefly explain in simple terms how gun tracing works?

Sure. First of all, good morning. Thank you for your question. Uh, so uh the trace starts uh from the point of where the firearm was manufactured. And uh in most cases a firearm uh goes from the manufacturer to a uh distributor, uh and from a distributor to a wholesaler or a retailer. Uh, ATF uh uses that trace data to identify who the first purchaser was, uh and uh in some cases uh the first purchaser could have been just a few days prior. In many cases there's a period of time in between and it's var- it varies from firearm to firearm uh basically what our agents do uh is uh if if the when the trace is conducted if it turns out to be uh in our out of business records uh at the National Tracing Center we are able to query to see if that serial number is in the out of business records if it's not in the out of business records and we have uh access through uh e-trace uh uh the e-trace system to the manufacturer's uh systems we can identify ok which manufacturer was it we contact them they're all very cooperative they tell us when it was manufactured who it went to and our

Sorry Mike.

investigators go out and interview folks to determine

Thank you.

where that firearm first entered the public market

Yes thank you so much for that so gun tracing helps law enforcement figure out trafficking patterns um it helps to determine how a gun got to the crime scene how it gives us and it gives us viable information to stop the spread of illicit firearms. Director Sequeira, ATF's gun tracing database is not the same as a searchable national registry of law abiding gun owners, correct?

That there is no searchable gun database for American gun owners.

Thank you. So because federal law already prohibits a national gun registry, these rules aren't in place to villainize gun owners. They're here to keep us safe. I emphasize this because Republicans have convened this hearing today around the hard amendments, which are a cluster of riders to spending bills that limit how ATF and the FBI can use the data they collect to trace and track gun trafficking. These riders don't even really protect gun owners, they protect the gun industry. Now, Director Cicada, I'd li- also like to ask you about the thirty-four rules you recently proposed, either deregulating firearm requirements or streamlining processes to e- ease the burden on federally licensed firearm dealers. In announcing these rules, you were surrounded by representatives of firearm industry groups. Did you, just yes or no, did you consult with gun industry affiliated groups, such as the NRA, Gun Owners of America, the NSSF, uh which is the firearm industry trade association, uh in formulating and drafting uh the rule makings?

No, we did not.

Uh did you consult with any victims uh and survivors of gun violence?

No, we did not.

Uh did you consult with any gun violence prevention organizations?

We did not.

Um are you familiar with the concept of industry capture? Uh what would you say to those who look at the announcement and the process for crafting these rules and see that ATF is uh or might perceive ATF to be influenced by the very firearm industries it's meant to police.

Uh, did you say industry capture? I'm sorry, I didn't hear you properly.

Yes, sir.

Yeah.

Um

Did you say, yeah, I'm sure.

As if you're familiar with the concept of indust- of industry capture.

Uh, well, the first time I heard that was uh reading a news article, I believe it was y- today uh this morning, and so I I can tell you ATF isn't captured by anyone. Uh, we are focused on doing our job and following the law. Uh, I purposely didn't meet with anyone. We took the information that we have uh noticed over the years. Again, I've been doing this thirty-four years, uh, and working in the most violent cities in the United States and risking my life along with the lives of all of our partners around the country to try to make America's communities better. Um, there is ambigu- ambiguity in the law, uh, and I think it's important for people to be able to follow the law, to understand the law, and when federal agents don't understand the law themselves, that leaves all of us at risk. Uh, we there shouldn't be any room there. So, uh, no, and w- a- and again people were upset at me from both sides because we didn't include anyone but in order to try and make changes uh we we had to do it in the way we did so that we can now discuss this through the NPRM process. Pe- everyone, your constituents, everyone's constituents in this room will have the opportunity to comment, we will take those comments seriously.

Okay. Thank you, and I look forward to that, and I will be sending you a letter with additional concerns and questions that I have around this role-making process. And I urge you to consider these regulations and remember your mission to keep Americans safe. As it stands, Americans are not safe. And there is a deep perception and reality that there are certain lobbyists, gun uh the gun industry that have influence over our processes, they have influence over our pol- over our policy making, and it's important that we root that out and that we are honest about that. I thank you for your time and I yield back.

gentle lady yields and recognize mister Gosar for five minutes of questioning.

Thank you, Chairman Higgins. The Fire uh Fire Arm Owner's Protection A Act bans the federal government from creating a national gun owner database and the Teahart Amendment prevents the ATF from sharing firearm records of law abiding Americans my bill HR seventy six seventy eight, the grip act goes further by blocking federal funds from helping states or local governments create similar databases. I introduce a group back in response to several unconstitutional disclosures of private information of and and firearms. In twenty twelve, the J- Journal News published the names and addresses of gun permit holders in New York. In twenty twenty two, the California Department of Justice released the personal information of nearly hundred ninety-two thousand concealed carry applicants. And in twenty twenty four, the ATF released the firearm records to the USA Today despite those records being protected under the Teahart Amendment. Later that same year the ATF also released firearm data to the to the far-left magazine known as The Trace in violation of federal law. My bill, the GRIP Act, makes sure that federal tax dollars are never used to support state record-keeping systems that put Americans' privacy at at risk. Directors, does the federal government maintain any federal firearm databases?

Uh, sir, the the closest thing uh to a uh what I would call a database is the National Firearms and Transfer Record which applies to NFA firearms. Uh, as if as it applies to any other firearms that are uh li- uh that are under the GCA, there is no database.

OK, so in twenty twenty-one, ATF leaked a memo leaked by gun owners of America revealed that the ATF does does have a federal firearm database containing over five m- fifty million out of business records of gun dealers. I- is this not a firearm database maintained by the federal government?

It is not a firearms database. It's uh again, sorry I'm sorry, I'll explain what the out of business records uh are and uh the out of business records are um there's under law as well, uh once a federal firearms licensee goes out of business, they're required to turn over their records to ATF within thirty days. ATF's uh national tracing center uh ends up processing these records uh that come in all shapes and forms, ripped, torn, old, uh moldy, et cetera, and uh they scan these forms into our uh uh system there. Uh in the system, the only thing that's actually searchable is a serial number, uh and and most manufacturers' serial numbers are repeated, uh uh even s- when for example a police officer tries to determine if a firearm is stolen, you have to include make, model, and serial number to be able to determine which firearm you're actually referring to. Those records are completely separate from every f- active federal firearms licensee that's operating in the United States. So if we if we try to conduct a trace and we try those initial out of business records which we are required to maintain by law uh and we strike out, we don't have anything, we have to try to determine where the when it was manufactured from the manufacturer then we get to that federal firearms licensee and then it's a phone call where they actually have to go through all their files and find the individual forty four seventy three if they are using a paper system a lot of the FFLs today use a digital system that we don't have access to so they're able to tell us in short order if we call them late at night that um uh madam propi madam proprietor hey there was a shooting we try to track down who may have had this firearm they have to go through their records to provide us that information we don't have access to it and ultimately for court we would go and obtain an original copy, provide them with the receipt and then return the original copy once we were done with the case.

So has the ATF ever violated the Teahart uh amendment?

Uh as I said we have uh I I I I what I'm aware of inadvertantly, I'm not aware of any intentional releases done by anyone on my staff uh during my time that I've been in a leadership position.

So you so you you you said that there it has been violated right

uh say it again sir

it the tr amendment was violated right

it was and i said uh as i uh answered uh chairman haggins that uh there was a inadvertent leak that i'm aware of not a leak a inadvertent uh uh failed attempt to redact information that was responsive to goa and that resulted in information being released that shouldn't be released so you're correct

ok

well i i'm strongly opposed to any gun owners database congress must pass my bill to defund state registries and eliminate all federal gun owner registries uh whether it lasts sixty years thirty years twenty years and ten years a registry is still a uh registry congress has always rejected the idea of government keeping a list of fire home owners thank you i yield uh yield back

The gentleman yields and Mister Bell is recognized for five minutes for questioning.

Thank you Mister Chair. Um first, it's really good to see the Moms Demand Action T-shirts in the crowd. I I should have expected that, but it's certainly a pleasant surprise to see you all there. I say it all the time, if you wanna know my policies on common on common sense gun safety laws look at their website. Um, mister Sakata, um unlike many of the this administration's appointees, um you actually have ex- um e- experience in this field and so that's actually refreshing to see. Um, but as a former prosecutor, um, which I'm sure you've been involved in many of these investigations like myself, I've learned a simple reality, and that is most guns used in crimes started somewhere legal. They're manufactured, sold by a licensed dealer, and a background check is completed. And that's where the paper trail begins and too often where it ends. But what happens next is the real problem, simple but yet profound, and that is guns move. Guns move from licensed dealers into the secondary market. They move through unlicensed sellers who aren't running background checks, aren't keeping records, and aren't accountable to anyone, and they end up at crime scenes. And too often I've shown up at crime scenes and seen not only people being harmed, but children as well, both of which are tragic. The bipartisan Safer Safer Communities Act addressed the loophole loophole law enforcement had raised concerned about concerns about for years. The quote unquote " engaged in the business" rule created clear standards for when repeated gun sales crossed the line into a legal unlicensed dealing. But on May sixth, twenty twenty six of this year, obviously, ATF published proposed changes that would weaken that rule. Weakening these standards makes it harder to ensure repeat for profit gun sellers, sellers get a federal license, keep records, and run background checks. And when you roll back these standards, the behavior does not stop. The accountability is what stops. Unlicensed sellers can operate more freely, sell more guns, and do so knowing it will be harder for law enforcement to stop them. And we know how the story ends. Missouri already showed us. In two thousand seven, Missouri repealed its permit to purchase law and firearm homicides increased by forty-seven percent in our state. Law enforcement also began recovering much newer guns at crime scenes, a sign that illegal gun trafficking was increasing. But here's what makes this moment especially troubling. We're not just weakening an enforcement tool, we're doing so while this Congress is further threatening our ability to track the impact of these decisions through limits on gun trace data and research. Director Sakata, I have several questions about how the ATF plans to explain explain that to the American people. So how does weakening the engaged in the business rule improve public safety?

Uh, first of all, good morning and thank you for your question. Uh, the engage in the buil- business rule did not help public safety at all, uh, to be very frank. Uh, so this is not the first attempt, uh, that was done in the history that I've been working with ATF on.

I'm gonna reclaim my time just because I'm short on time and I wanna get as many questions as I can.

Sure.

In this proposal, ATF concedes that weakening this rule may cause some previously deterred sellers to go back to operating without a license. The resulting risk to public safety is described as de minimis. Please explain that characterization to this committee, because families impacted by gun violence in my district and across the country might describe those consequences very differently. How did ATF reach that conclusion?

Uh, ATF reached that conclusion because we have licenses to become an FFL you have to go through ATF to get a federal firearms license. We know how many uh come into business uh each year and how many go out of business each year. So we specifically were looking at those numbers and saw a a minuscule increase uh in the number of people who became federal firearms licensees since the time that the EIB rule came into effect uh and uh t- for us uh that showed us nothing. It showed us zero impact. public safety uh but the uh the uh the negative result on ATF when you compile some of the other things that were uh put on the agency frankly some of the release of other information some of uh the efforts as it was on stabilizing brace and other things all caused the agency uh to receive a negative result on our budget which I can tell you uh had a negative impact on public safety. uh the engaged in the business rule, I could give you an example, every year somewhere between six to nine thousand FFLs go into business, six to nine thousand go out of business, kinda like the restaurant business, it's a tough business. And there's uh folks that are uh been doing this for decades and they've been following the l- rules, and those people interact with ATF very much. Uh I will make one comment cuz you mentioned BSA, I'd like

Well, well briefly because I'm, I wanna be respectful to the time, um the problem is is that what we're seeing is the gun violence increasing. You cannot weaken accountability, limit the data used to measure the results, and still claim you're protecting public safety. Uh, I yield back.

Gentleman yields. Uh, Representative Perry of Pennsylvania is recognized with five minutes for questioning.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, Mr. Sekata, thanks for your service to our country and for the work that you do. I'm just curious generally about your professional in your position relationship with the Department of Justice and and the Attorney General.

Uh, well, I met the uh first of all, good morning and thank you again.

Good morning.

Uh, so I met the Attorney J- the current Acting Attorney General, uh, I think it was February or March of last year. Uh, the entire team at the Attorney General's office is new, so I've only known them through a professional work relationships since that time.

Alright, so when when the uh cuz uh I've got a lot of questions about the DOJ and I'm trying to see how they might pertain to you so when the DOJ does things that seem to be in your lane as the director of the ATF do you weigh in do you have regular meetings, does your staff question how does all that go or is there no conversation whatsoever they do their thing you watch from afar you might agree disagree is there a so i'm just wondering about that

i think uh that's a a a pretty broad question so i think uh uh in the areas that uh we we have meetings on a regular basis we are in phone contact uh daily uh if if not once a day multiple times a day but there's things for example

ok

that uh uh matters that were in the courts uh in a legislative uh area and uh that doj was handling i don't work with them on a daily uh uh matter at all. That that's something in a civil litigation that's being represented by DOJ, they'll handle it. Uh they may consult with our chief counsel at ATF uh to ensure that we're in the uh, the right lane, but for the most part uh they will deal with ATF when it it involves for example um uh, the regulatory package that just went out, uh any uh criminal enforcement operations that we have targeting cities that are being impacted by violent crime, I will present not the minutia as to what's going on in the operation, but we will lay out the plan for a surge in a number of cities to reduce violent crime.

OK, thank you, and I'm wondering particularly about actions the DOJ has taken, and I know that you may not have been here as long as some of these things, but the previous administration accidentally sent GOA unredacted information in a foyer production uh the fe uh the atf secured a gag order against the goa and i'm just wondering um now that was the atf secured the gag order order against the goa which generally gag orders are meant to protect those that the government is prevailing upon not silence them so um in that regard What has been your input regarding that particular instance? Are you familiar or you're not familiar?

I am, and that's the same uh case uh that we were talking about earlier, sir, uh the uh case that GOA was involved in and uh that did occur in the previous administration, so I wasn't personally involved in that but I'm familiar with it. And as I stated, that particular case uh was a inadvertent release by our employees in the FOIA section.

Right.

So uh as far as ATF's uh discussion at the time and DOJ's, input. I wasn't involved. I'm not aware what the uh conversations were about that matter.

And allegedly the same program was used to spy on January, so-called January sixth defendants and to enforce state assault weapons so-called s- assault weapons bans are you familiar with that?

I am not.

Do you know if anybody's been held accountable at ATF for those actions?

For uh if you can be uh specific as to which actions you're referring to.

the ones that were used uh to uh um enforce state assault weapons bans.

I am not familiar with that, um and as to, just to be clear, as to the GOA, the inadvertent release, no one has been held accountable because we don't believe that anyone actually did anything intentionally, but we have held ourselves accountable by changing process and purchasing the appropriate application to prevent, and eliminate things like that again.