US Supreme Court Invalidates Federal Bump Stock Ban, Limiting Agency Power

US Supreme Court Invalidates Federal Bump Stock Ban, Limiting Agency Power REUTERS/Elizabeth Frantz – RC21B8AQ80OX

Dil Bar Irshad | June 14, 2024 | 11:31 PM IST | Courts & Law, United States of America, World | Follow on Google News

US Supreme Court Invalidates Federal Bump Stock Ban, Limiting Agency Power

US Supreme Court Invalidates Federal Bump Stock Ban, Limiting Agency Power

Key Highlights:

1. Supreme Court strikes down federal bump stock ban, limiting agency power.
2. Decision reignites gun control debate, following 2017 Las Vegas shooting.
3. Justice Clarence Thomas emphasizes bump stocks do not equate to machine guns.

The US Supreme Court has struck down a federal ban on bump stocks, initially implemented during the Trump administration. This ruling curtails federal agencies’ authority to autonomously enact regulations, CNN reported.

Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion for the 6-3 decision, while Justice Sonia Sotomayor led the dissent, joined by the court’s liberal wing. The ban was advocated by former President Trump following the 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting, which resulted in 58 deaths. Bump stocks enable a semi-automatic rifle to fire rapidly, mimicking automatic fire.

“A bump stock does not convert a semi-automatic rifle into a machine gun any more than a shooter with a lightning-fast trigger finger does,” Thomas stated. He clarified that even with a bump stock, a semi-automatic rifle fires one shot per trigger pull.

The legal challenge was brought by Michael Cargill, a Texas gun store owner. After surrendering his bump stocks to authorities in 2018, Cargill sued to reclaim them. Under federal regulation, possessing a bump stock carried a penalty of up to 10 years in prison.

While the case did not hinge directly on Second Amendment rights, it reignited gun control debates and marked a significant legal dispute. The decision aligns with the Supreme Court’s recent trend of supporting gun rights advocacy groups, CNN noted.

In her dissent, Sotomayor expressed concern, stating, “The decision hamstrings the Government’s efforts to keep machineguns from gunmen like the Las Vegas shooter.” Emphasizing her disagreement, she delivered her dissent orally from the bench, a rare move.

Sotomayor argued, “A bump-stock-equipped semi-automatic rifle fires ‘automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.’ Because I, like Congress, call that a machine gun, I respectfully dissent.”

The bump stock debate is linked to 1930s gun control legislation targeting figures like Al Capone. Amendments to the law culminated in the 1986 prohibition on machine guns. Both Trump and Biden administrations argued that bump stocks function as machine guns under the law.

The ATF estimated that about 520,000 bump stocks were sold between 2010 and 2018. These accessories replace a rifle’s standard stock, allowing automatic-like firing through recoil if the shooter maintains trigger pressure. Opponents of the ban claimed the ATF overstepped its authority with the reclassification.

Initially, lower courts sided with the Justice Department. However, the full 5th Circuit Court of Appeals later supported Cargill’s position. During February’s oral arguments, the Supreme Court appeared divided, with conservative justices questioning the retroactive prosecution of bump stock owners.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh expressed concerns about criminalizing possession retroactively, potentially ensnaring unsuspecting citizens. Another key issue was whether Congress, not the ATF, should have jurisdiction over such bans, reflecting broader debates on regulatory authority.

Thomas’s opinion meticulously differentiated bump stocks from automatic weapons, noting that multiple shots with a bump stock-equipped rifle require more than one trigger function.

This decision underscores ongoing debates over gun control, agency jurisdiction, and constitutional interpretation, with significant implications for future regulatory actions and legal challenges in firearms legislation.

Dil Bar Irshad

Dil Bar Irshad is a seasoned journalist, hails from Jammu Kashmir's Doda, covers political, social, business stories, index stories.