by In a 6-3 decision with the majority opinion written by Justice Clarence Thomas, the Supreme Court has struck down the ban on bump stocks. Joining in the majority opinion were Chief Justice Roberts and Associate Justices Alito, Gorsuch, Kavanaugh, and Barrett. Justice Alito also had a concurring opinion. Finally, in no surprise to anyone reading this, Justice Sotomayor wrote the dissenting opinion in which she was joined by Justices Kagan and Jackson.
From the opinion which affirmed the 5th Circuits en banc decision in favor of Michael Cargill:
We hold that a semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a “machinegun” because it cannot fire more than one shot “by a single function of the trigger.” And, even if it could, it would not do so “automatically.” ATF therefore exceeded its statutory authority by issuing a Rule that classifies bump stocks as machineguns
Justice Thomas examined the mechanics of how a semi-automatic trigger works in an AR-15. Illustrating this with graphic diagrams, he concluded that the addition of a bump stock does not change the single “function of the trigger”. He said it merely reduces the time between the separate functions of the trigger. He goes on to add, “A bump stock does not convert a semiautomatic rifle into a machinegun any more than a shooter with a lightning-fast trigger finger does.” Too bad he didn’t mention Jerry Miculek by name! He goes on to say that the position of the ATF and Justice Sotomayor’s dissent are logically inconsistent. This is due to the acknowledgement that a person can bump fire without using a bump stock and that a semi-auto rifle without a bump stock fires only one shot with each pull of the trigger.
Justice Alito in his concurrence notes that the statutory language is clear and the Court must follow it. Taking note of the Mandalay Bay shooting, Alito says a tragic event itself does not change the law’s meaning. If there is to be a national ban on bump stocks, then it is up to Congress to amend the law.
In her dissent, Justice Sotomayor says the majority has just put bump stocks back in the civilian hands. This, of course, ignores the fact that actual machine guns reside in the hands of civilians as the National Firearms Act did not ban civilian ownership but merely taxed the possession. The rest of her dissent goes on to criticize Thomas’ opinion and its examination of the mechanics of a trigger function.
She ends with this hyperbole:
Today’s decision to reject that ordinary understanding will have deadly consequences. The majority’s artificially narrow definition hamstrings the Government’s efforts to keep machineguns from gunmen like the Las Vegas shooter.
I am sure that the gun control industry will be wailing and gnashing their teeth over this decision regardless of how faithful it is to the letter of the law. While some states have banned the possession and sale of bump stocks which is their sovereign right, there is not now a national ban on them. It does emphasize just how important the elections in November will be for our civil rights. If President Biden wins and the Democrats take both houses of Congress, I am sure a national ban will follow forthwith.