In a developing legal story, the Supreme Court of the United States has agreed to consider whether the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) can ban bump stocks under the current law that prohibits machine guns. The decision to take up the case signals its possible significance in the arena of firearm regulation and federal administrative law.
The particulars of the case rest on the ATF’s interpretation of a 1986 law that bans machine guns. The ATF maintains that bump stocks—devices that use recoil energy to increase a semiautomatic firearm’s rate of fire—are included in this prohibition.
Proponents of bump stocks, however, argue that the ATF’s interpretation is overbroad and that bump stocks do not convert semiautomatic firearms into machine guns. The technical definition of a machine gun, as stated in the 1986 law, is a firearm that fires more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger. They argue that a firearm equipped with a bump stock still only fires one shot per trigger pull, and the increased rate of fire is contingent on the shooter’s ability to maintain pressure on the trigger.
In considering the case, the Supreme Court will likely review not just the specifics of bump stocks and the machine-gun law, but also the broader issue of federal agency power to interpret and enforce laws. This comes amid a larger conversation about the role of administrative agencies, their interpretation of laws, and what checks exist on their power.
For legal professionals keeping an eye on the precedent this might set, the case, although primarily about a mundane object of gun accessory, could have broader implications for administrative law. Determining the scope of an agency’s power and how it interprets the laws it is tasked with enforcing can impact many areas of law beyond firearms.
Regardless of where one stands on the use of bump stocks, the potential impact of this case on the balance of power between administrative agencies and the courts cannot be underestimated.
For further information and commentary on this story, visit here.