Gun rights advocates are celebrating a Supreme Court ruling that struck down a Trump-era policy banning rapid-fire rifle bump stocks. Bump stocks were used in the Las Vegas country music festival shooting, which was the deadliest mass shooting in recent U.S. History.
Use of Bump Stocks
Bump stocks enable legal firearms to fire bullets at a rate comparable to machine guns, which are highly restricted in the United States. Bump stocks were used by the shooter in the Las Vegas shooting to increase the capacity of his semiautomatic rifles. Using this accessory, which the Trump Administration subsequently banned, the shooter was able to fire more than 1,000 rounds of bullets into a crowd in only 11 minutes, killing dozens of individuals and wounding hundreds more.
Majority Opinion
Justice Clarence Thomas wrote the majority opinion of the Court, which was decided 6-3 that the Trump-era Justice Department acted unlawfully in determining that bump stocks turned legal semiautomatic rifles into illegal machine guns.
Legal Reasoning
The majority opinion argument is that adding the bump stock accessory to the firearm does not transform the firearm into an illegal weapon because each time the trigger is pulled, only one shot is released, even though the releases are in quick succession.
Limits on Regulatory Power
While the Court’s determination exerted a limit on the Administration’s regulatory power, finding that the Justice Department’s actions were overreaching its authority, two Justices, conservative Samuel Alito, and liberal Sonia Sotomayor, conveyed their beliefs that the legislature could provide the relief sought unsatisfactorily by the Administrative action. Congress could act to ban the bump stocks without running into the legal issues the Court found with the Presidential action.
Political Reactions
Neither Democrats nor many Republicans cheered or cheered on the Court’s decision. It is one rare occurrence in which the Democrats are not celebrating overturning a Trump-era initiative.
Legislative Prospects
Despite mainstream dissatisfaction that the regulation has been overturned, there is likely no political will or capital at this time to move toward bipartisan legislation imposing the same ban on bump stocks.
Presidential Responses
President Biden has asked Congress to pass a law reinstating the ban. Former President Trump has expressed respect for the Supreme Court’s decision and is unlikely to take any further position, as maintaining the support of the gun rights community and the National Rifle Association endorsement, in particular, is of topmost concern leading into November’s presidential election.
Trump’s Position on Gun Rights
Trump told members of the NRA earlier in 2024 that “nothing happened” to curtail gun rights during his Administration. However, there was “great pressure” to implement gun control following several highly publicized and deadly mass shootings. Trump has committed to the NRA that in a potential second term, “No one will lay a finger on your firearms.”
Reaction from Gun Control Advocates
Gun control advocates spoke disappointedly of the ruling. Danette Meyers, a spokesperson for victims of the Las Vegas shooting, said, “The ruling is just another way of inviting people to have another mass shooting. Unfortunately, they have to relive this again. They’re depressed.”
Nevada’s Governor’s Response
Nevada’s Republican Governor Joe Lombardo expressed disappointment at the ruling, citing his former service as county sheriff in Las Vegas. Lombardo said, “While I have always supported the Second Amendment, I have been a vocal opponent of bump stocks since my time in law enforcement. I’m disappointed by the Supreme Court’s decision today.”
Governor Lombardo’s Stance
Lombardo, while opposing bump stocks, is generally opposed to gun control laws, and he has refused to sign several gun control laws that crossed his desk after advancing from the Nevada legislature.
Conservative Court’s Expansion of Gun Rights
Since holding the supermajority in the Supreme Court, the conservative Justices have generally expanded gun rights. Another case is pending before the Court and should be decided soon. The law in question in the forthcoming decision involves the legality of restricting access to guns for those under domestic violence restraining orders.
Sotomayor’s Dissent
Justice Sotomayor wrote the dissent for the court opinion. In the document, she agreed with the Justice Department’s claim that a semiautomatic rifle enhanced by a bump stock was materially similar to an illegal machine gun. Wrote Sotomayor, “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.”
