Fact Check: Did ATF Director Say He Wasn't a Firearms Expert?

Representative Jim Jordan has been a staunch opponent of gun control measures throughout his time in Congress, voting against raising minimum age requirements and assault weapon bans.

This week, the Ohio Republican targeted Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) Director Steven Dettelbach during a hearing that examined new regulations on pistol brace accessories.

Questioning Dettelbach's competency in the role, Jordan posted on social media afterward claims that the ATF chief, who would oversee the new changes, was not even a firearms expert by his own admission.

The Claim

A tweet by Jordan, posted on April 26, 2023, viewed 199,000 times, claimed Dettelbach was not a firearms expert.

Jordan tweeted: "Secretary Pete doesn't have real transportation experience.

"ATF Director Dettelbach admits he isn't a firearms expert.

"And Jake Sullivan, Biden's National Security Advisor, was part of the Benghazi and Afghanistan debacle."

The Facts

The quote that Jordan used is missing context that alters the meaning of what Dettelbach actually said.

The source of the claim comes from a Budget Hearing of the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Commerce, Justice, Science, and Related Agencies on April 18, 2023.

The hearing scrutinized policies that would regulate stabilizing gun braces, such as pistol braces. The braces are due to become illegal to possess without a license from June 1, 2023.

The ATF says that "any weapons with 'stabilizing braces' or similar attachments that constitute rifles under the NFA must be registered no later than May 31, 2023; or the short barrel removed and a 16-inch or longer rifle barrel attached to the firearm; or permanently remove and dispose of, or alter, the "stabilizing brace" such that it cannot be reattached; or the firearm is turned in to your local ATF office. Or the firearm is destroyed."

During the course of the hearing, Dettelbach was asked by Representative Jake Ellzey, a Texas Republican, to define an assault rifle. This is where the claim that Jordan made is misleading. Dettelbach did not say that he was not a firearms expert but deferred to Ellzey's knowledge.

"I'll go shorter than that, because honestly, if Congress wishes to take that up, I think Congress would have to do the work, but we would be there to provide technical assistance," he said.

"I, unlike you, am not a firearms expert to the same extent as you maybe, but we have people at ATF who can talk about velocity of firearms, what damage different kinds of firearms cause, so that whatever determination you chose to make would be an informed one."

The exchange can be viewed below from 1:12:25 onward.

An "assault weapon," as Newsweek previously explored, has a myriad of definitions, complicated and expanded by legislation over the past 30 years that has captured weapons beyond rifles including pistols and machine pistols.

The subcommittee discussion around ATF regulations on pistol braces was pertinent to this, as the new rules had argued that these braces could effectively turn pistols into a type of short-barrel rifle.

In any case, the quote that Jordan and others have used to discredit him is only a partial quote that, arguably, could have been said out of polite deference to the representative who had asked Dettelbach a question.

Newsweek has reached out to Jordan for comment.

The Ruling

Needs Context.

At a recent scrutiny hearing, examining upcoming changes to the sale of pistol braces, Dettelbach said that he was "not a firearms expert to the same extent" as Ellzey.

This might have been polite deference as much as a statement of fact, but Jordan's quote did not include this additional clause.

FACT CHECK BY Newsweek's Fact Check team