Supreme Court to decide whether ATF can prohibit bump stocks under law banning machine guns

Home

Daily News

Supreme Court to decide whether ATF can prohibit…

U.S. Supreme Court Supreme Court to decide whether ATF can prohibit bump stocks under law banning machine guns

By Debra Cassens Weiss

November 6, 2023, 1:10 pm CST

•  
• !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0],p=/^http:/.test(d.location)?'http':'https';if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src=p+'://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js';fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document, 'script', 'twitter-wjs'); Tweet  
• lang: en_US  
• reddit_target='law';  
• 

A salesman displays a bump stock installed on an AR-15 rifle in 2017, before the device was banned by the Trump administration. (Photo by Jim Watson/AFP via Getty Images)

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday agreed to decide whether the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives can prohibit bump stocks under a law banning machine guns and parts intended to convert weapons into machine guns.

At issue is whether bump stocks can be banned under the National Firearms Act because they can convert rifles into weapons that rapidly fire more than one shot, according to the cert petition. Among the publications with coverage are Law360, the New York Times, SCOTUSblog and Reuters.

Bump stocks use a semi-automatic gun’s recoil “to quickly re-engage the trigger after firing,” according to a January decision by the en banc 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. The New Orleans-based appeals court had struck down the ATF rule.

The Trump administration had banned bump stocks after a Las Vegas gunman killed 58 people at a country music festival in October 2017. Some of the gunman’s weapons were fitted with bump stocks.

The National Firearms Act defines banned machine guns as weapons that shoot or that can be restored to shoot “automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.” The law also covers parts designed and intended to convert a weapon into a machine gun.

The plaintiff in the case is Texas gun shop owner and firearms instructor Michael Cargill. He is represented by the New Civil Liberties Alliance, which is asking the U.S. Supreme Court to affirm the 5th U.S. Circuit’s en banc ruling, according to a press release.

The 5th Circuit decision is in accord with a subsequent ruling by the Cincinnati-based 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. But the U.S. Courts of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit and 10th Circuit at Denver have rejected challenges to the ATF rule, according to the press release.

The case is Garland v. Cargill.

Related topics: 5th Circuit Court | 6th Circuit Court | 10th Circuit Court | D.C. Circuit Court | U.S. Supreme Court | Administrative Law | Constitutional Law | Second Amendment | Public Interest You might also like:

• Law prof, 78, sues Northwestern for alleged age bias in pay raises
• Former Baltimore state's attorney convicted for claiming pandemic hardship to get retirement cash
• GOP can put Trump on primary ballot, even if he is ineligible for office, top Minnesota court rules
• Ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines likely constitutional, 7th Circuit says
• Alabama inmate may be first person to be executed this way

Give us feedback, share a story tip or update, or report an error.