“ATF Exceeded Its Statutory Authority”: Supreme Court Rules Bump Stock Ban Is Unconstitutional

On Friday, the Supreme Court invalidated the Trump administration’s bump-stock rule, which the Biden administration defended, in a 6-3 vote authored by conservative Justice Clarence Thomas. 

*BUMP STOCK BAN TOSSED OUT BY SUPREME COURT IN GUN-RIGHTS WIN

— zerohedge (@zerohedge) June 14, 2024

“ATF exceeded its statutory authority by issuing a Rule that classifies a bump stock as a “machinegun” under §5845(b),” the Supreme Court said in the Garland v. Cargill case, otherwise known as the bump stock case.

Justice Thomas wrote the opinion:

Congress has long restricted access to “‘machinegun[s],'” a category of firearms defined by the ability to “shoot, automatically more than one shot . . . by a single function of the trigger.” 26 U. S. C. §5845(b); see also 18 U. S. C. §922(o). Semiautomatic firearms, which require shooters to reengage the trigger for every shot, are not machineguns. This case asks whether a bump stock—an accessory for a semiautomatic rifle that allows the shooter to rapidly reengage the trigger (and therefore achieve a high rate of fire)—converts the rifle into a “machinegun.” We hold that it does not and therefore affirm.

Meanwhile, Justice Sonia Sotomayor issued a fiery dissent: 

The majority’s reading flies in the face of this Court’s standard tools of statutory interpretation. By casting aside the statute’s ordinary meaning both at the time of its enactment and today, the majority eviscerates Congress’s regulation of machineguns and enables gun users and manufacturers to circumvent federal law.

The Garland v. Cargill lawsuit was filed by Texas gun dealer Michael Cargill, who owned several bump stocks before the ban took effect and later handed them over to the government.

As a reminder, bump stocks are not machine guns—something we’ve reiterated over the years. These devices only function by using the recoil energy after the trigger is pulled, allowing the operator to fire hundreds of rounds. 

Let’s also remind readers where this non-sense bump stock rule began… 

Cargill has released a statement on X: 

I WON@centexguns @ComeAndTalkIt @NCLAlegal #bumpstock #CargillVGarland pic.twitter.com/JK6t8HZUid

— Michael Cargill (@michaeldcargill) June 14, 2024

Here’s what X users are saying:

A bump stock is not a machine gun.

Not a hard decision.

— Buck Sexton (@BuckSexton) June 14, 2024

SCOTUS overturns bump stock ban. 6-3 decision. This was the regulation put in place by the Trump administration in the wake of the Las Vegas mass shooting.

— Jonathan Allen (@jonallendc) June 14, 2024

ATF loses the bump stock case 6-3 along predictable ideological lines. Thomas opinion, Alito concurs. Not a hard case.

— Dan McLaughlin (@baseballcrank) June 14, 2024

Bump stock ruling 6-3 says ATF went beyond its authority saying bump stocks are classified as “machine guns”.

Shall not be infringed.

— Josh Barnett-AZ (@BarnettforAZ) June 14, 2024

The ruling today ends the nationwide ban on bump stocks. It’s also a huge win for gun rights advocates. 

We weren’t expecting Justice Sotomayor to concede that semi-automatic rifles are in common use in her Cargill dissent! Here’s hoping SCOTUS agrees and takes our IL gun ban case. pic.twitter.com/4tski48tAb

— Hannah Hill (@hannahhill_sc) June 14, 2024

… 3 – 2 – 1. Anti-gunners will have a meltdown today. 

*   *   * 

Read Here: