Washington (Associated Press) supreme court On Friday, it rescinded the Trump administration’s ban. Bump StockRapid-fire gun accessories, The deadliest mass shooting The ruling was the first in modern U.S. history to bring firearms back into the national political spotlight.
High Court Conservative majority The Trump administration was deemed to have gone too far in reversing course from the previous administration and banning bump stocks, which allow guns to fire at rates comparable to those of machine guns. The decision came after a Las Vegas shooter attacked a country music festival with a semi-automatic rifle equipped with the accessory.
The gunman fired more than 1,000 shots into the crowd over an 11-minute period, wounding hundreds, killing dozens and sending thousands fleeing in terror.
The ruling, in an unusual turn of events, has thrust gun issues back to the center of political debate, with Democrats criticizing the Republican administration for changing its behavior and many Republicans supporting the ruling.
The 6-3 majority opinion, written by Justice Clarence Thomas, held that the Department of Justice erred in declaring that bump stocks turned semi-automatic rifles into illegal machine guns because pulling the trigger in rapid succession only fires one bullet.
The ruling reinforced the limits of executive power, with conservative Justice Samuel Alito and liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor each emphasizing that congressional action can result in more durable policy if there is the political will to act on a bipartisan basis.
The ban was originally imposed through regulation rather than legislation during President Donald Trump’s presidency, leaving Republicans under pressure to act in the wake of the massacre and other mass shootings. High School in Parkland, FloridaThe chances of passing gun control legislation in the current divided Congress are slim.
President Joe Biden, a supporter of gun control, called on Congress to reinstate the ban imposed under his political rival, while the Trump campaign, after saluting the ruling, quickly shifted focus to the endorsement by the National Rifle Association.
While Trump has courted the support of gun owners to return to office, he has appeared to downplay his administration’s actions on bump stocks. In February, he told NRA members that “nothing has happened” on guns during his presidency despite “tremendous pressure” to do so. He told members that if he is re-elected, “nobody is going to get their hands on your guns.”
The motive behind the 2017 Las Vegas massacre, which was blamed on a high-stakes gambler who killed himself and whose motive remains a mystery, left 60 people dead, including Christiana Duarte, whose family called Friday’s verdict a tragedy.
“This sentence is just another avenue for people to commit another mass shooting,” said Danette Myers, a family friend and spokeswoman. “It’s unfortunate that they have to go through this again. They’re really not happy.”
Nevada Gov. Joe Lombard, a Republican and former Las Vegas County sheriff who has refused to sign several gun control bills sent to him by the Democratic-controlled Legislature, said in a statement Friday, “I have always been a supporter of the Second Amendment, but have been a vocal opponent of bump stocks since my years in law enforcement. I am disappointed in the Supreme Court’s decision today.”
The ruling follows a decision by the Supreme Court’s conservative majority. A landmark decision and expanding gun rights in 2022. The Supreme Court is also expected to rule in another gun case in the coming weeks, challenging a federal law aimed at keeping guns away from minors. Domestic violence restraining order.
But the argument in the bump stock case was not about Second Amendment rights, but about whether the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, an agency of the Department of Justice, exceeded its authority.
A bump stock is a rifle stock replacement accessory invented in the 2000s that uses the recoil energy of a gun to pull the trigger against a shooter’s stationary finger, allowing the gun to fire at speeds similar to those of an automatic rifle.
The Supreme Court majority held that the 1934 Machine Gun Prohibition Act defines a machine gun as a weapon that can automatically fire one or more shots with a single pull of the trigger. Bump stocks do not fit that definition because “the trigger still must be released and then pulled again to fire an additional round,” Thomas wrote. He also pointed to more than a decade of ATF findings that found bump stocks are not automatic rifles.
In a video posted online, plaintiff Michael Cargill, a Texas gun shop owner and former military officer, praised the ruling and predicted the case would have a ripple effect blocking other ATF gun regulations. “I’m glad I stood up and fought,” he said.
The Supreme Court building is seen in Washington, Thursday, June 13, 2024. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein)
In a dissent joined by her liberal colleagues, Justice Sotomayor wrote that bump stocks fall within the law’s ordinary meaning: “If I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck, I call it a duck.” She said the ruling could hinder the ATF’s work with “deadly consequences.”
ATF Director Steve Dettelbach agreed, saying bump stocks “pose an unacceptable level of risk to public safety.”
The Supreme Court took up the case after lower courts disagreed. Under Republican President George W. Bush and Democrat President Barack Obama, the ATF had determined that bump stocks don’t turn semi-automatic rifles into machine guns. The agency overturned those decisions. At Trump’s requestThis came after the Las Vegas massacre and the Parkland, Florida, shooting that left 17 people dead.
Sixteen states and the District of Columbia currently have bans on bump stocks and are unlikely to be affected by the ruling, but four states’ bans may no longer cover bump stocks as a result, according to gun control group Everytown.
Cargill was represented by the New Civil Liberties Union, a group funded by conservative donors such as the Koch Network. Cargill’s lawyers acknowledged that bump stocks allow rapid fire, but argued they are different in that the shooter must exert more effort to keep the gun firing.
The Biden administration has argued that the effort was minimal and said the ATF reached the correct conclusion about bump stocks after a more thorough investigation following the Las Vegas shooting.
The plaintiffs said in court documents that there were about 520,000 bump stocks in circulation when the ban went into effect in 2019, and people would have to return or destroy them, with total losses estimated at $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 the assault rifle referenced to an assault rifle, not a semi-automatic rifle.
___
See Associated Press coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court below. https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.
