An Examination of Recent DOJ Responses on Second Amendment Rights

In a recent reply from Hadiza L. Buge, Acting Assistant Deputy Director of Public and Governmental Affairs, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) addressed concerns raised by a citizen regarding firearm regulations in Illinois, specifically the Firearm Owner’s Identification (FOID) card requirement. This inquiry was initially submitted on March 27, 2025, as a civil rights complaint.

“We recently received your message regarding firearm laws and Second Amendment rights,” Buge stated, noting that the DOJ had forwarded the inquiry to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) for further insights.

Context of the Complaint

This complaint represents the second instance of the citizen attempting to hold Attorney General Pam Bondi accountable for her prior commitments to uphold Second Amendment rights. A previous submission requested an investigation into an anti-gun judge’s potential conflicts of interest.

“This Department of Justice will not stand idly by while States and localities infringe on the Second Amendment rights of ordinary, law-abiding Americans,” said Bondi in a statement about a similar investigation involving Los Angeles County.

Key Concerns Raised

The citizen outlined several critical issues regarding the FOID requirement:

• The law was perceived as a mechanism to deter minority groups, notably African Americans, from obtaining firearms during periods of social unrest.
• Funding from FOID card fees is reportedly diverted by the Illinois General Assembly for unrelated projects, causing significant delays, with waiting periods extending up to 20 months.
• A specific case involved a woman with no criminal background facing charges for possessing a firearm without a FOID card.

DOJ’s Response and Implications

Buge’s response emphasized the ATF’s focus on federal laws and suggested that the citizen should direct inquiries regarding state issues to their representatives. The implications of this message suggest a lack of federal intervention in state fire arms regulations.

“In support of this mission, ATF implements policy and regulations to enforce laws created by Congress,” the response clarified. “We encourage you to reach out to your State congressional delegation with your recommendations regarding firearm laws.”

Concerns Regarding Governance and Accountability

Critics have raised questions about the effectiveness of DOJ leadership. The response was issued by an acting assistant deputy director rather than higher-ranking officials, prompting discussions on the adequacy of federal oversight concerning Second Amendment rights.

Additionally, Bondi’s stated commitment to actively protecting Second Amendment rights stands in stark contrast to the apparent limitations observed in their recent actions, raising concerns about accountability and enforcement.

Future Directions and Advocacy Suggestions

Some advocates suggest that a dedicated “Second Amendment Czar” could better represent gun owners’ rights within the federal framework. However, others argue that without the inclusion of independent voices from the gun rights community in forming policies, the DOJ may continue to misalign its practices with the needs and expectations of the public.

Conclusion

The ongoing dialogue surrounding Second Amendment rights in Illinois underscores a tension between state regulations and federal oversight. As citizens advocate for their rights, the effectiveness of government responses remains under scrutiny.

For further discussions and analysis on Second Amendment issues, consider following David Codrea, an advocate for gun rights and an investigative journalist.