Supreme Court Is Split: Will They Reverse Or Keep Bump Stock Ban?

On Wednesday, liberal and conservate justices were debating over the use of a bump stock and it’s ban.

Should it be illegal?

A bump stock isn’t technically a machine gun but it does give off that apperance, was the overall theme of the day.

For those that don’t know, ChatGPT will explain what that is:

A bump stock is a firearm accessory that enables semi-automatic rifles to fire at a rate similar to that of a fully automatic firearm. It uses the recoil of the firearm to rapidly “bump” the trigger against the shooter’s finger, allowing for a continuous firing action. Bump stocks gained significant attention and controversy following their use in the 2017 Las Vegas shooting, after which there were calls for their regulation or banning.

In the United States, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) announced a rule change in 2018, categorizing bump stocks as “machine guns” and effectively banning their sale and possession. This rule went into effect in March 2019, making it illegal to possess bump stocks in the U.S.

After a day of back and forth, the Supreme Court was split.

Conservatives wondered if the federal government was too vague when it interpreted the law when banning it in 2018.

Liberals pointed out that this type of device possibly falls under the type of weapons that 1934 National Firearms Act sought to outlaw.

‘Not The Way It Works’: Attorney Opposing Bump Stock Ban Repeatedly Explains To Liberal Justices How Guns Workhttps://t.co/FXEVFh4VYr

— Daily Caller (@DailyCaller) February 28, 2024

ABC News reports:

The Supreme Court on Wednesday appeared open to upholding a Trump-era ban on bump stocks as devices that turn weapons into rapid-fire illegal “machine guns,” however it was not clear that a majority of justices would ultimately back such a ruling or agree on the rationale.

During oral arguments in the case Garland v. Cargill, both liberal and conservative justices suggested the devices – which allow a shooter to fire a semi-automatic rifle more rapidly and accurately – pose a significant danger and could reasonably be considered the types of weapons Congress sought to outlaw in the 1934 National Firearms Act.

Investigators say several of the devices were used to perpetrate America’s deadliest mass shooting in 2017 in Las Vegas, where a gunman killed 60 people and injured more than 500.

“There was significant damage from machine guns, carnage, people dying, et cetera. And behind this is a notion that the bump stock does the exact same thing,” noted Justice Clarence Thomas. “So, with that background, why shouldn’t we look at a broader definition?”

At the same time, the court appeared divided and at times confused over the technical specifications of a fully automatic “machine gun,” whether they are replicated by adding a non-mechanical bump stock, and what the criminal liability could be for hundreds of thousands of Americans who legally purchased the accessory from store shelves.

The Justice Department’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms had legally approved bump stocks for sale for eight years starting in 2009, classifying them as recreational firearm accessories. More than 700,000 are said to have been sold. But after the 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting, the agency changed course, reinterpreting the 1934 law and ordering the devices surrendered or destroyed.

“Intuitively, I am entirely sympathetic to your argument,” Justice Amy Coney Barrett told the administration’s attorney, Deputy Solicitor General Brian Fletcher, who was defending the ban. “It seems like, yes, that this is functioning like a machine gun would. But, you know, looking at that definition, I think the question is, why didn’t Congress pass that legislation to make this cover it more clearly?”

ADVERTISEMENT

“Those weapons do exactly what Congress meant to prohibit when it enacted the prohibition on machine guns, and those weapons are machine guns because they satisfy both disputed parts of the statutory definition,” Fletcher argued in his opening statement.

Justice Neil Gorsuch said he could “certainly understand why these things should be banned” but also wrestled with the implications of the ATF rule change on hundreds of thousands of Americans who had thought they were purchasing them legally.

“It’s going to ensnare a lot of people who are not aware of the legal prohibition,” said Justice Kavanaugh, echoing Gorsuch. Justice Alito also called potential prosecution of people who had legally purchased bump stocks as “disturbing.”

Why it’s NOT a 2nd amendment case. @Queen_City_News 🎥Supreme Court Divided over Federal Ban on Bump Stocks & Machine Guns #bumpstock #guns #supremecourt @khalifrhodes #2ndAmendment

WATCH FULL ➡️https://t.co/bLtgHMLoCY pic.twitter.com/KgAeLynYTv

— ALICIA BARNES (@AliciaBarnesTV) February 29, 2024

USA Today adds:

After a gunman used bump stocks on some of his 22 semiautomatic rifles to mow down concertgoers in Las Vegas in 2017, then-President Donald Trump directed the Justice Department to regulate the devices.

But the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ determination that a bump stock met the definition of a machine gun, which are illegal for private use, was different from what the agency said in the past − another sticking point for some of the justices.

The court’s three liberal justices, meanwhile, repeatedly tried to bring the focus back to the effect of the bump stocks.

ADVERTISEMENT

“At some point, you have to apply a little bit of common sense to the way you read a statute,” said Justice Elena Kagan, who used to go hunting with the late Justice Antonin Scalia, “and understand that this statute comprehends is a weapon that fires a multitude of shots with a single human action.”

What makes a gun ‘automatic’?

Bump stocks combine two legal devices, a plastic stock and a firearm, that together function like a machine gun. The bump stock harnesses the recoil of the rifle to accelerate trigger pulls, technically “bumping” the trigger for each shot after it bounces off the shooter’s shoulder. A rifle can then fire between 400 and 800 rounds per minute.

Here’s a clip showing that the Supreme Court justices aren’t really sure how this device even works. Someone needs to roll in a large TV like they did in school, and have them watch a 2 min clip from YouTube that demonstrates how this bump stock works and what it’s capable of.

NOW: Listen to Supreme Court justices hearing the Bump Stock case Garland v. Cargill fully admit that they have no idea how guns work, with one even asking if a Bump Stock can be a trigger. pic.twitter.com/BmfbdAGHq0

— Craig R. Brittain (@RealBrittain) February 28, 2024

The Supreme Court just heard the bump stock case, Cargill v. Garland! 
 
GOA filed a brief in support of Cargill to SCOTUS earlier this year. We're happy to support this case and excited for the High Court to recognize what gun owners have known for years, that a bump stock is… pic.twitter.com/hyySZkQOb0

— Gun Owners of America (@GunOwners) February 28, 2024