Trump’s pretty egregious attack on our gun rights was before the Supremes today. There was no clear majority on either side so we might get our balls stomped on in this case yet. This case is a potential disaster for our second amendment rights and possibly a huge gift to the administrative state.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday was divided over the validity of a 2018 federal regulation banning the “bump stock” rifle attachment. The Trump administration regulation barred ownership of bump stocks, which transforms a semiautomatic rifle into a weapon that can discharge at a rate of hundreds of rounds per minute, under an existing general prohibition of machine guns. Although some of the court’s conservative justices expressed concern that the regulation could subject the owners of bump stocks to criminal liability even though the devices were legal when they purchased them, several justices also contended that the lethal capacity of semiautomatic rifles fitted with bump stocks was precisely the kind of weapon that Congress intended to target.
If SCOTUS follows the Constitution and Federal law, then the Bump Stock ban is an easy “UnConstitutional” decision.
It is bigger news that SCOTUS has agreed to hear Trump’s Presidential Immunity case. To be heard the week of April 22.
ACB? She’s been pretty good on guns on unpopular issues, like guns for felons. Roberts would BF anyone.
As to the case, I only heard the last bit of arguments. This isn’t a gun case, it’s an administrative power case, but they spent WAY to much time totally misunderstanding guns, physics and the English language.
I think we’re going to lose this one. Even though the bump stock follows the letter of the law as written, the argument being put forward that the initial activation of the trigger by the shooter then automatically is reactivated by the stock is one the court will buy.
I predict at 7-2 loss. Maybe even 9-0.
Bump stocks, binary triggers, and FRT’s are the nectar of the tards, and tards don’t make good arguments that SCOTUS is likely to buy.
It was the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals that nixed it, but only because the government hadn’t given adequate comment time for it (so kind of a niche legal splitting of hairs, not a ruling on the subject itself). IIRC this was back in August of last year. I suspect that any further decisions on the braces, one way or another, will be strongly influenced by this bump stock case.
One of the “troubling” aspects of the bump stock issue to a few Justices was the fact that it made you a felon overnight for owning one. The brace bullshit had what was in effect an “amnesty” where you could register your now-SBR for free. That’s why I don’t hold out high hopes for the brace ban, and quite frankly the bumpstock ban either once it all shakes out.
So, they explicitly said that this wasn’t a 2A fight. This was a language, legislative intent, and physics/causation fight.
The problem with bump-stocks is that they could get ruled being functionally machine guns, then you can make a 2A argument. And the problem on that is the Brownshirt, statist Saint Scalia when he, for some G*D damn reason just had make an off-hand dicta statement in Heller about M16s.
Is the stock spring loaded? If so maybe. If its pulled by the shooter, the stock is doing nothing and the shooter is pulling the trigger. The only way its ruled an MG is lies and dishonesty.