Supreme Court Strikes Down Bump Stock Ban

The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday, June 14, 2024, overturned a federal ban on bump stocks, devices that enable semi-automatic rifles to fire at a rate similar to automatic weapons. The 6-3 decision marks a significant victory for gun rights advocates, as reported by The Associated Press.

apnews.com reported, This ban was initially implemented by the Trump administration in 2018, following the devastating 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting. That tragic event, which killed 60 people, involved a gunman who used rifles equipped with bump stocks, as detailed by The New York Times.

Justice Clarence Thomas authored the majority opinion, asserting that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) exceeded its authority. The Court found that bump stocks do not transform semi-automatic rifles into "machine guns" under the National Firearms Act, according to SCOTUSblog.

apnews.com noted, The majority reasoned that a bump stock does not allow a weapon to fire "automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger." Instead, it requires continuous manual action from the shooter, as explained in the Court's opinion.

Justice Sonia Sotomayor penned a forceful dissent, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson. She argued that the majority's interpretation ignored the practical reality of bump stocks, which effectively create machine guns, CNN reported.

apnews.com reported, The ruling immediately drew sharp criticism from gun control advocates, who expressed concern over public safety implications. Conversely, gun rights organizations lauded the decision as a defense of statutory interpretation and a check on federal agency power, according to Fox News.

This decision could limit the power of federal agencies to interpret existing laws, potentially requiring Congress to act directly on such matters. Many states, however, already have their own bans on bump stocks in place, The Washington Post noted.

• Background of the Ban and Las Vegas Tragedy: The federal ban on bump stocks was a direct response to the horrific October 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas, Nevada. Stephen Paddock, the perpetrator, used multiple rifles fitted with bump stocks to fire thousands of rounds into a concert crowd, resulting in 60 deaths and hundreds of injuries, as documented by Reuters. The unprecedented scale of the violence, facilitated by these devices, spurred widespread calls for action.
• ATF's Regulatory Reversal: Prior to the Las Vegas shooting, the ATF had repeatedly determined that bump stocks were not "machine guns" under federal law because they did not alter the internal mechanics of a firearm. However, under pressure from the Trump administration and public outcry, the agency reversed its stance in 2018, reclassifying bump stocks as machine guns and banning their sale and possession, a move detailed by The Wall Street Journal.
• Majority's Strict Statutory Interpretation: Justice Thomas, writing for the majority, emphasized a strict textual interpretation of the National Firearms Act's definition of a "machine gun." The Court concluded that a bump stock does not enable a firearm to shoot "automatically more than one shot... by a single function of the trigger," because the shooter must still apply forward pressure to "reset" the trigger for each shot, even if rapidly, according to legal analysis from SCOTUSblog.
• Dissent's Focus on Practical Effect: Justice Sotomayor's dissent strongly argued that the majority's technical reading ignored the common-sense understanding and practical effect of bump stocks. She famously stated, "When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck," implying that a device allowing a semi-automatic rifle to fire like a machine gun should be treated as such, as reported by NPR.
• Political and Social Implications: The ruling intensifies the ongoing national debate over gun control, particularly in an election year. Gun rights organizations, including the National Rifle Association, praised the decision as a victory for Second Amendment rights and a check on executive overreach. Conversely, gun control advocacy groups like Everytown for Gun Safety condemned the ruling, warning of increased gun violence risks, according to statements reported by The Guardian.
• Impact on Federal Agency Authority: This decision could have broader implications for the regulatory power of federal agencies. By overturning the ATF's reinterpretation, the Supreme Court signaled a potential limitation on an agency's ability to redefine terms within existing statutes without explicit congressional authorization. This may necessitate legislative action from Congress to address regulatory gaps, as discussed by legal experts on CNN.
• Future Legislative and State-Level Actions: While the federal ban is overturned, several states, including California, New York, and Florida, have their own laws prohibiting bump stocks. The Supreme Court's ruling does not affect these state-level bans. However, passing new federal legislation to ban bump stocks would likely face significant hurdles in a politically divided Congress, making immediate federal action improbable, The Washington Post indicated.