The Supreme Court on Friday struck down a Trump-era ban on bump stocks. These are accessories for rapid-fire weapons used inSupreme Court on Friday struck down a Trump-era ban on bump stocks. These are accessories for rapid-fire weapons used in the worst mass murders in modern U.S. history. With his ruling the worst mass murders in modern U.S. history. With his ruling, he put firearms back into the nation’s political spotlight.
The Supreme Court’s conservative majority found that the Trump administration overstepped its authority when it reversed course and banned bump stocks, which allow a rate of fire comparable to that of a machine gun. The decision came after a gunman attacked a country music festival in Las Vegas with a semi-automatic rifle equipped with an accessory.
The gunman fired more than 1,000 rounds into the crowd in 11 minutes, sending thousands fleeing in terror, wounding hundreds and killing dozens.
The ruling put firearms back at the center of the political debate, but in an unusual turn of events. Democrats denounced the Republican administration’s policy rollback, while many Republicans supported the ruling.
In a 6-3 majority opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Thomas found that the Department of Justice erred in finding that bump stocks turn semiautomatic rifles into illegal machine guns when it declared that they only fire one shot in rapid succession.
Hdhhdhd
The decision reaffirmed the limits of executive power, and two justices, conservative Samuel Alito and liberal Sonia Sotomayor, independently emphasized that congressional action can lead to more sustainable policies if there is political will among non-citizens, which is not partisan action.
The ban was originally imposed by executive order, rather than by law, during President Donald Trump’s term in office to ease pressure on Republicans following the massacre at a high school in Parkland, Florida, and another mass shooting. The prospects for passing gun control in the currently divided Congress are dim.
President Joe Biden, a supporter of gun control, has called on Congress to reinstate bans imposed under his political opponents. Meanwhile, the Trump campaign, after expressing respect for the ruling, quickly jumped on the National Rifle Association’s support for the ruling.
As President Trump courts gun owners in his reelection campaign, he has appeared to downplay his administration’s approach to bump stocks. In February, he told an NRA committee member that “nothing has happened” during his presidency despite “tremendous pressure.” He told the group that if he is reelected, “nobody will touch your firearms.”
The 2017 Las Vegas massacre was carried out by a man who was a frequent gambler and turned suicidal, but his exact motives are a mystery. The murders left a total of 60 people dead, including Christiana Duarte, whose family called Friday’s ruling tragic.
“This ruling is really just another invitation for people to commit new mass murders,” said Danette Myers, a family friend and spokeswoman. “It’s unfortunate that they have to go through this again. They are really unhappy.
Republican Nevada Gov. Joe Lombardo, a former Las Vegas County sheriff who has refused to sign several gun control bills put forward by the Democratic-controlled Legislature, said in a statement Friday, “I have been a vocal opponent of bump stocks since my time in law enforcement, and I am disappointed in today’s Supreme Court decision.”
The decision came after the same conservative supermajority on the Supreme Court issued a landmark decision on expanding gun rights. 2022 has now passed. The Supreme Court is also set to rule in another gun case in the coming weeks, challenging a federal law aimed at keeping guns away from people under domestic violence restraining orders.
But arguments in the bump stock case have focused more on whether the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, an agency of the Department of Justice, overstepped its authority, rather than on Second Amendment rights.
A bump stock is an accessory that replaces a rifle’s stock, i.e. the part that rests on your shoulder. Invented in the 2000s, they use the recoil energy of a weapon to hold a trigger against the shooter’s motionless fingers, causing the weapon to fire at a velocity similar to that of an automatic rifle.
The Supreme Court majority noted that the Machine Gun Act of 1934 defines a machine gun as a weapon that can automatically fire multiple shots with a single pull of the trigger. Bump stocks do not meet this definition because they “require the release and repulsion of the trigger for each subsequent shot,” Thomas wrote. He also pointed to more than a decade of ATF findings that argued bump stocks are not automatic weapons.
Plaintiff Michael Cargill, a Texas gun store owner and military veteran, praised the ruling in a video posted online and predicted the case would create ripples because it would preclude other ATF gun regulations. “I’m happy to stand up and fight,” she said.
In a dissenting opinion joined by her liberal colleagues, Justice Sotomayor explained that bump stocks fall under the ordinary interpretation of the law. “A duck, I call this bird a duck,” she wrote. She said the ruling would cripple the ATF, potentially with “deadly consequences.”
ATF Director Steve Dettelbach agreed, saying bump stocks “pose an unacceptable risk to public safety.”
After disagreements among lower courts, the Supreme Court took up the case. Under the administrations of Republican President George W. Bush and Democrat Barack Obama, the ATF ruled that bump stocks do not turn semiautomatic rifles into machine guns. At President Trump’s urging, the agency reversed those decisions after the Las Vegas massacre and the Parkland, Florida, shooting that left 17 people dead.
According to the gun control group Everytown, 16 states and the District of Columbia have their own bans on bump stocks and are not expected to be affected by the ruling, but the bans in four states may no longer apply to bump stocks after the ruling.
Cargill represented the New Civil Liberties Union, an organization funded by conservative donors such as the Koch Network. His lawyers acknowledged that bump stocks allow for rapid firing, but argued that bump stocks are different because shooters need more force to keep the gun firing.
The Biden administration had argued that the ATF reached the correct conclusion regarding bump stocks after a more thorough investigation after the Las Vegas shooting, and that its efforts were minimal.
When the ban went into effect in 2019, about 520,000 bump stocks were in circulation. The plaintiffs said in court documents that investors had to surrender or destroy them, resulting in an estimated total loss of $100 million.
Associated Press writers Mark Sherman and Lisa Mascaro in Washington, Jill Colvin in New York, Mike Catalini in Trenton, New Jersey, Jim Salter in St. Louis, Scott Sonner in Reno, Nevada, and Jim Vertuno in Austin, Texas, contributed to this report.
This story has been updated to correct a reference to an assault rifle instead of a semi-automatic rifle.
