Supreme Court Temporarily Upholds Biden Administration’s Regulations on ‘Ghost Guns

Supreme Court Temporarily Revives Biden Administration’s Regulation of “Ghost Guns”

In a recent development, the Supreme Court has temporarily revived the Biden administration’s regulation of “ghost guns” – kits that can be purchased online and assembled into untraceable homemade firearms. The court’s decision came in response to the administration’s request, citing a rise in violence involving untraced firearms.

The court’s brief order did not provide any reasons for its decision, which is typical in emergency applications. The order is provisional, meaning that the regulation will remain in place while a challenge to it moves forward in the courts.

The vote was 5 to 4, with Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justice Amy Coney Barrett joining the court’s three liberal members – Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, and Ketanji Brown Jackson – to form a majority. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr., Neil M. Gorsuch, and Brett M. Kavanaugh dissented but did not explain their reasoning.

The regulation, issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives in 2022, expanded the bureau’s interpretation of the definition of “firearm” in the Gun Control Act of 1968. The change required manufacturers and sellers of gun kits and components to obtain licenses, mark their products with serial numbers, and conduct background checks.

However, gun owners, advocacy groups, and companies that produce or distribute these kits and components filed a lawsuit challenging the regulations, arguing that they were not authorized by the 1968 law. In July, Judge Reed O’Connor of the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Texas sided with the challengers and struck down the regulation, stating that a weapon parts kit is not a firearm.

The Biden administration appealed the decision, leading to the recent Supreme Court ruling. Solicitor General Elizabeth B. Prelogar argued in the administration’s emergency application that the regulation was necessary to address the public safety and law enforcement crisis caused by the increasing prevalence of untraceable firearms.

The administration’s opponents questioned the validity of the data presented, disputing the alleged spike in homemade firearms. They also objected to the term “ghost guns,” calling it a propaganda term that does not appear in federal law.

The Supreme Court’s decision to temporarily revive the regulation is seen as a significant step in addressing the issue of untraceable firearms. The court’s ultimate ruling on the matter will have far-reaching implications for gun control and public safety in the United States.

How will the Supreme Court’s temporary revival of the regulation impact the future of gun control policy and the Biden administration’s efforts to implement stricter measures

Majority. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel A. Alito Jr., Neil M. Gorsuch, and Brett M. Kavanaugh dissented.

The regulation, which was initially issued by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in May 2021, seeks to require individuals who build their own firearms from kits to undergo background checks and obtain serial numbers for their weapons. This would close a significant loophole in federal gun laws that currently allows individuals to evade background checks by purchasing unassembled gun parts.

Proponents of the regulation argue that it is necessary to address the growing problem of untraceable firearms contributing to gun violence. They cite instances where these “ghost guns” have been used in mass shootings and other crimes, as well as the difficulty law enforcement faces in tracking and preventing their proliferation.

Opponents, however, contend that the regulation violates the Second Amendment rights of individuals to bear arms and disproportionately affects law-abiding gun owners. They argue that the definition of a firearm should be limited to fully assembled and operable weapons, and that the regulation would unfairly burden individuals who enjoy building their own firearms for personal use.

The Supreme Court’s decision to temporarily revive the regulation is seen as a significant victory for the Biden administration’s efforts to implement stricter gun control measures. While this is only a temporary reprieve, it indicates that the court may be willing to uphold the regulation in the future.

The case will now proceed through the lower courts, where its ultimate fate will be determined. It remains to be seen whether the regulation will withstand legal challenges and become a permanent fixture in gun control policy. For now, though, the Biden administration can continue to enforce the regulation and work towards addressing the issue of untraceable firearms.