The Supreme Court overturned in the case Garland v. Cargill, decided on June 14, 2024. In a 6-3 ruling, the court struck down the federal ban on bump stocks, a gun accessory that allows rapid firing of semiautomatic rifles.

Texas Megachurch Pastor Faces Sexual Abuse Allegations - USA Herald

Climate Hell Unleashed: Wildfires Rage Across the Southwest - USA Herald

Gemini AI: A Multimodal Powerhouse Transforming Google - USA Herald

US and China Locked in Tech Supremacy Battle - USA Herald

History of Bump Stocks 

Bump stocks were invented in the early 2000s, after the expiration of a federal assault weapons ban. They replace a rifle's stock and utilize recoil to rapidly "bump" the trigger finger, enabling the discharge of dozens of rounds in seconds.

Initially, the federal government approved bump stocks in 2010, concluding they didn't qualify as illegal machine guns. However, this shifted in 2019, after the Las Vegas massacre. A gunman used bump stock attached to guns to kill 60 people and injure hundreds in the deadliest mass shooting in modern history.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) reclassified bump stocks as machine guns, effectively banning them. This decision formed the basis of the legal battle.

ATF Overreach

Justice Clarence Thomas delivered the court's opinion, arguing that the devices don't convert rifles into fully automatic machine guns, as defined by federal law. The law specifically states a machine gun must be capable of firing "more than one shot by a single function of the trigger."

Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in a dissenting opinion, expressed deep concern about the potential consequences of the ruling, stating it could have "deadly consequences."

The court ultimately ruled that the ATF overstepped its authority by enacting the ban. This distinction between a rule and a law proved crucial. The court emphasized it was overturning a rule, not a federal law.

The court held that “ATF exceeded its statutory authority by issuing a Rule that classifies a bump stock as a “machinegun” under §5845(b).” 

And in “(a) A semiautomatic rifle equipped with a bump stock is not a “machinegun” as defined by §5845(b) because: (1) it cannot fire more than one shot “by a single function of the trigger” and (2) 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.”

Legal Implications

The Supreme Court's decision effectively lifts the ban on bump stocks, allowing civilians to acquire them once again. However, the legal landscape remains uncertain. Individual states might enact or maintain their own restrictions on a bump stock.

Gun rights advocates argue the Second Amendment protects access to bump stocks, while opponents highlight the potential for increased gun violence.