In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court has declared the federal bump stock ban unconstitutional. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, articulated that a bump stock does not transform a semiautomatic weapon into a machine gun, a pivotal distinction in the court’s decision.
The decision marks a major victory for gun rights advocates and sets a precedent for how firearm modifications are legally interpreted. Justice Thomas’s majority opinion emphasized the technical and functional aspects of bump stocks, arguing that they do not meet the statutory definition of a machine gun.
Bump stocks are devices that allow semiautomatic rifles to fire more rapidly, mimicking the firing rate of fully automatic weapons.
In her dissenting opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor said: “Today, the Court puts bump stocks back in civilian hands. To do so, it casts aside Congress’s definition of ‘machinegun’ and seizes upon one that is inconsistent with the ordinary meaning of the statutory text and unsupported by context or purpose. 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. A bump-stock-equipped semiautomatic rifle fires ‘automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger.’ §5845(b). Because I, like Congress, call that a machinegun, I respectfully dissent.”
Bump stocks sparked national debate after being used in the tragic 2017 Las Vegas shooting, which took the lives of 60 innocent people and injured hundreds.
At the time, the Trump administration unilaterally decided to have the ATF ban bump stocks instead of having Congress do it.
Friday’s landmark decision will likely have far-reaching consequences for gun legislation and the regulatory authority of federal agencies like the ATF.
Reactions swiftly poured in on social media.
This is a breaking news story. Please check back for updates.
READ NEXT: US Capitol Police Swarm As Radical Protesters Attempt Futile Takeover
