Steven Dettelbach, director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, faced fire Wednesday from House Republican lawmakers over his alleged lack of expertise and candor in his position.
Mr. Dettelbach, a former U.S. prosecutor who was the first ATF director to be confirmed in seven years last June, was grilled by GOP lawmakers for having no proficient knowledge on firearms, alcohol, explosives and tobacco. But, they said, he wrote and enforced regulations related to each one, including a recent rule on pistol braces.
Republican lawmakers called the new rule inconsistent with previous guidance on the braces that are expected to become illegal to possess without a license on June 1.
“You told them one thing 10 years ago, and now you’re telling them something else,” said Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, Ohio Republican, asserting that owners of the pistol brace will become felons upon the deadline.
Mr. Dettelbach defended the new rules, signed by Attorney General Merrick Garland, and cautioned that unwitting violators likely wouldn’t face prosecution and the 10-year prison penalty, given prosecutors’ priorities.
“The law doesn’t ban anything nor does the rule apply to all stabilizing braces,” Mr. Dettelbach said. “The rule under the National Firearms Act helps define and clarify what the characteristics of a firearm would be as a short-barrel rifle.”
Rep. Darrell Issa, California Republican, asked Mr. Dettelbach if he was an expert in firearms. He referenced a question on which the ATF director was taken to task by Rep. Jake Ellzey, Texas Republican, over the definition of an “assault weapon” at a House Appropriations subcommittee hearing last week.
“If you’re referring to the statement I made, there was a member who was a veteran. I respect very much people’s service to our military, who said that he had been an expert,” he said.
“I told him I might not be an expert to the same extent he is, and I’m certainly not an expert to the same extent that people who work for decades at ATF as firearms experts who examine the mechanics, velocity speeds,” Mr. Dettelbach said.
Mr. Issa asked if he was an expert in tobacco, to which Mr. Dettelbach replied, “I spent my career as a federal prosecutor putting [away] gang members, violent criminals, cartel cases.”
Mr. Dettelbach told the committee that his explosives background extended only to cases that he prosecuted involving the attempted terrorist bombing of a bridge in Ohio near Cleveland.
Mr. Issa said, “You have no expertise specifically in what the men and women of the ATF in various stages are experts on? Is that correct?”
Mr. Dettelbach replied, “Respectfully, the ATF is a law enforcement agency. I have worked with ATF and law enforcement.”
Democrats defended Mr. Dettelbach’s background as a prosecutor and went after Republicans for their criticism of the new ATF director. They accused GOP lawmakers of creating a dangerous environment for suggesting to “abolish the ATF.”
“The expertise is amongst the thousands of men and women who this group of friends on the other side of the aisle want to abolish. So the folk that they’re citing as experts, they want to just throw them out,” said Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas Democrat.
“Let me be very clear. My friends on the other side of the aisle want to abolish the ATF, all the persons that they have cited, sending letters, knowing the rules, being experts, all of them, they want to abolish,” she said.
Republicans, however, noted that Mr. Dettelbach still failed to define an “assault weapon” when Ms. Jackson Lee asked him if this type of firearm was used during a deadly mass shooting in Buffalo, New York last year.
“Just to pay tribute and acknowledge that these are the deceased, their families are still mourning of the incident in Buffalo at the grocery store, it was an assault weapon that killed them,” she said. “My question to you is just simply a yes or no. You know what an assault weapon is? You’ve seen one.”
Mr. Detelbach replied, “Again, and that would be a decision for Congress to make respectfully as to make that definition. There are numerous different legislative bodies that have taken up that question.”
The Texas Democrat said, “If we laid a weapon on the table, you could pretty much say that falls in the category of assault weapon?”
Mr. Dettelbach answered that the definition would come down to different legislative bodies unless they delegated that authority to the ATF.
• Kerry Picket can be reached at kpicket@washingtontimes.com.