In a significant legal development, the nation's highest court addressed concerns over untraceable firearms that can be assembled from online-purchased components.
According to SCOTUSblog, the Supreme Court upheld a Biden-era rule regulating "ghost guns" in a 7-2 decision on Wednesday, affirming the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives' authority to regulate certain untraceable weapons under the Gun Control Act of 1968.
The ruling marks a crucial victory for the Biden administration's efforts to combat the proliferation of these weapons. Justice Neil Gorsuch, writing for the majority, emphasized that technological advances have transformed gun manufacturing and sales, particularly through 3D printing and reinforced polymers.
The ATF implemented the regulation in 2022 to address what they described as an exponential increase in ghost guns. The rule expanded the definition of firearms to include weapon parts, kits, and partially complete frames or receivers that can be readily converted into functional weapons.
A challenge to the rule emerged when gun owners and a gun-rights advocacy group filed a lawsuit in Texas. Initially, a federal district judge in Fort Worth blocked the rule nationwide, but the Supreme Court later allowed enforcement while appeals continued.
The majority opinion focused on specific examples, including the "Buy Build Shoot" kit from Polymer80, which enables buyers to construct Glock-variant pistols. Gorsuch noted that these kits clearly fall within the law's scope.
Justice Gorsuch explained the court's position, stating:
Companies are able to make and sell weapon parts kits that individuals can assemble into functional firearms in their own homes. Even as sold, the kit comes with all necessary components, and its intended function as instrument of combat is obvious. Really, the kit's name says it all: 'Buy Build Shoot.'
Justice Sotomayor addressed manufacturer concerns in her concurring opinion. She emphasized that companies have long worked with the ATF for guidance and suggested that failing to do so might indicate willful non-compliance.
Justice Thomas expressed strong opposition in his dissent, arguing that Congress never intended such broad regulatory power. Justice Alito questioned the majority's application of legal tests typically used for constitutional challenges.
The ruling leaves room for future legal challenges regarding specific ghost gun products. The court acknowledged that some items might fall outside ATF's regulatory authority if they require extensive modification.
Kavanaugh's concurring opinion highlighted concerns about criminal liability, particularly regarding background check requirements. He suggested the government should exercise discretion in enforcement.
The Supreme Court's decision represents a significant development in firearms regulation, specifically addressing the growing challenge of untraceable weapons assembled from components purchased online. The 7-2 ruling upholds the ATF's authority to regulate ghost guns under the Gun Control Act of 1968, though it leaves room for individual challenges to specific products.
The case stemmed from a challenge by gun owners and advocacy groups in Texas, leading to a nationwide injunction that was later stayed. While Justices Thomas and Alito dissented, the majority's decision, authored by Justice Gorsuch, establishes a framework for regulating weapon parts kits and partially complete frames or receivers, particularly focusing on products that can be readily converted into functional firearms.
