Estimated reading time: 3 minutes
Washington, DC – November 3, 2023 – In a significant legal development, the U.S. Supreme Court will deliberate on the New Civil Liberties Alliance’s (NCLA) challenge against the ATF’s bump-stock ban.
This marks the third NCLA case the Court has taken up in less than a month.
Table of contents
High Stakes for Gun Owners
The Court’s decision to hear the case follows a request for a writ of certiorari in Garland v. Cargill. The NCLA is set to contend the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit’s ruling.
This ruling states that the ATF’s regulatory ban is in conflict with the statutory definition of “machineguns.”
A Reversal of ATF’s Standpoint
The ATF’s 2018 Final Rule reclassified bump-stock-equipped semi-automatic firearms as “machineguns,” which are prohibited by federal law.
This decision overturned the ATF’s previous stance that these firearms were legal.
The rule affected not only Michael Cargill, an Army veteran and gun shop owner, but also half a million Americans. They were ordered to destroy or surrender their legally acquired bump stocks.
Legal Battles and Differing Opinions
The Fifth Circuit’s decision in January was a major win for the NCLA, asserting Congress’s sole authority to ban bump stocks.
This ruling aligns with the Sixth Circuit and the Navy-Marine Corps Court of Criminal Appeals. However, it contrasts with the Tenth and D.C. Circuits, which upheld the ATF’s rule.
NCLA’s Argument
The NCLA argues that only Congress has the power to create new criminal laws. The 1986 statute banning machine guns did not include bump stocks.
The NCLA believes the ATF overstepped its bounds by expanding the reach of criminal laws. They assert this turned many Americans into felons overnight.
NCLA’s Record in the Supreme Court
Garland v. Cargill is NCLA’s fourth case in the Supreme Court in under two years.
Previous cases include a unanimous decision for NCLA client Michelle Cochran and upcoming arguments in challenges against the Chevron doctrine and federal attempts to influence social media censorship.
NCLA’s Statements — Why It Matters
Richard Samp, Senior Litigation Counsel at NCLA, expressed satisfaction with the Supreme Court’s decision to hear the challenge. He emphasized the ATF’s abrupt policy reversal and its implications for the rule of law.
Mark Chenoweth, NCLA’s President and General Counsel, also weighed in on the importance of the case:
This is not a case about gun rights. It is a case about administrative power. Congress never gave ATF the power to rewrite federal criminal statutes pertaining to machine guns—nor could it. Writing federal criminal laws is the sole preserve of Congress, and the Trump and Biden Administrations committed grievous constitutional error by trying to ban bump stocks without involving Congress. We are confident the U.S. Supreme Court will right this wrong for Michael Cargill and all Americans.
The Supreme Court’s decision in this case will be pivotal in defining the boundaries of administrative power and gun rights in the U.S.
The NCLA continues to challenge what it views as overreach by federal agencies, demonstrating its commitment to protecting civil liberties all the way to the highest court.
*** Buy and Sell on GunsAmerica! All Local Sales are FREE! ***
This is awesome, but……
“What if” the next mass shooting case motivates Congress to ban bump-stocks anyway? It the dems manage to beat a very incompetent Republican party and take back the House, keep the Senate and keep the White House, guaranteed it’ll happen.
I hope not, of course, but somebody has to say it.