Supreme Court upholds Biden-era ghost gun rule

[BumRushDaShow]

Last edited Wed Mar 26, 2025, 10:51 AM - Edit history (1)

Source: CBS News

Updated on: March 26, 2025 / 10:30 AM EDT


Washington — The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a Biden administration rule that regulates unserialized firearms called ghost guns, delivering a win for federal efforts to curb gun violence. The high court ruled 7-2 in finding that the rule from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is not facially inconsistent with federal firearms law. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented. Justice Neil Gorsuch authored the opinion for the majority.

"The GCA embraces, and thus permits ATF to regulate, some weapon parts kits and unfinished frames or receivers, including those we have discussed," Gorsuch wrote, referencing the Gun Control Act of 1968. The case before the Supreme Court did not involve the Second Amendment, but whether the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives went too far when it issued the rule subjecting ghost guns to the same requirements as commercial firearms.

It follows a decision from the high court last year that struck down a measure from the first Trump administration that outlawed bump stocks, which are devices that increase a firearm's rate of fire. It's unclear whether President Trump will keep the regulation in place or take steps to rescind it. The court was considering an appeal from the Biden administration of a lower court ruling that struck down the measure.

The regulation, issued in 2022, sought to address a surge in crimes committed using ghost guns, which can be made with 3D printers or kits and parts available online. The weapons don't have serial numbers or transfer records, making them difficult for law enforcement to trace and attractive to people who are prohibited from purchasing firearms.

Read more: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-ghost-guns-rule/

---

Short article at post time.

Link to OPINION (PDF) - https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-852_c07d.pdf

( mahatmakanejeeves)

Article updated.

Original article -

March 26, 2025 / 10:11 AM EDT


Washington — The Supreme Court on Wednesday upheld a Biden administration rule that regulates unserialized firearms called ghost guns, delivering a win for federal efforts to curb gun violence.

The high court ruled 7-2 in finding that the rule from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives is not facially inconsistent with federal firearms law. Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito dissented. Justice Neil Gorsuch authored the opinion for the majority.

The case before the Supreme Court did not involve the Second Amendment, but whether the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives went too far when it issued the rule subjecting ghost guns to the same requirements as commercial firearms.

It follows a decision from the high court last year that struck down a measure from the first Trump administration that outlawed bump stocks, which are devices that increase a firearm's rate of fire. It's unclear whether President Trump will keep the regulation in place or take steps to rescind it.

[Ocelot II]

1. I didn't have to read the linked article to know that the dissenters were Alito and Thomas.

[Paladin]

2. Count on Thomas and Alito to remain forever gun-horny.

Keep those two scumbags in mind, during the next few dozen school shootings this country suffers.

[mahatmakanejeeves]

3. Opinion:

https://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/24pdf/23-852_c07d.pdf

[BumRushDaShow]

4. Thanks!

Added to the OP!

[mahatmakanejeeves]

5. Oral arguments are going on now in Federal Communications Commission v. Consumers' Research.

There should be an article online about that starting noonish.

And good morning.

[BumRushDaShow]

7. Yup. Already have that story in a tab from early this morning

Have been waiting to see if they update because as soon as I post those early articles, they DO end up doing a major update.

(Plus I try to space out to let others have a chance)

And top of the morning to you and it'll soon be afternoon!

[Blasphemer]

6. Alito and Thomas are utterly incapable of being impartial jurists.

Judicial activism indeed.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

9. Deadline: Legal Blog--Supreme Court allows federal regulation of 'ghost gun' kits

The Biden administration sought to regulate kits for making untraceable weapons as if they’re regular firearms. Gun companies and groups went to court.
https://www.msnbc.com/deadline-white-house/deadline-legal-blog/supreme-court-ghost-guns-ruling-regulation-vanderstock-rcna174759

The Supreme Court sided with the federal government’s effort to regulate so-called ghost gun kits for making untraceable weapons.

Justice Neil Gorsuch wrote the majority opinion for seven justices upholding federal regulation, over dissent from Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito.

During Joe Biden’s presidency, the federal government argued that its regulation complied with federal law and was necessary because the weapons were increasingly being used in crimes. Challengers to the regulation, including gun rights groups and companies, claimed the government action exceeded the authority of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

The regulation didn’t seek to ban ghost guns but rather to regulate them like regular firearms, meaning that they need serial numbers, licensed dealers and background checks.

And though it’s a gun-related case, it didn’t call for interpreting the Second Amendment.

Explaining the issue, Gorsuch noted that the federal Gun Control Act regulates firearms sales, and this case posed the question of whether the act also applies to people who make and sell the kits at issue. In reaching the majority ruling, the Trump appointee wrote that the relevant ATF rule isn’t “facially inconsistent” with the act.

Three of the justices who joined Gorsuch’s opinion — Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Brett Kavanaugh and Ketanji Brown Jackson — each wrote concurring opinions. Alito and Thomas each wrote their own dissents, with Thomas writing that the majority “blesses the Government’s overreach based on a series of errors regarding both the standard of review and the interpretation of the statute.”

I enjoy the Deadline Legal Blog