Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Discussion of Firearm Politics & Legislation. This forum is now strictly limited to discussions directly related to firearms.

Moderators: Chuck, Mustang380gal, Coordinators, Moderators

M-Quigley
Posts: 4782
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:06 pm
Location: Western Ohio

Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Post by M-Quigley »

https://www.ammoland.com/2023/04/garlan ... v-cargill/

This is NOT an old link, it's dated April 7th 2023

Whether you want one or not, the bump stock ruling is important for all the other gun issues before the court as well. The reason is this is the most obvious or should be to the court from a legal standpoint, even if a justice hates a bump stock. If the ATF loses it doesn't automatically mean the other cases in the court will win, but it's pretty much a given that if SCOTUS upholds the bump stock ban, they're basically telling a president and the ATF that they can basically say whatever they want and it will be legal.

It's not about the object (the bump stock) as it is over the principle of the issue.
AUSTIN, TX – On Thursday, April 6th, 2023 at 10:30 pm, With only minutes to spare, the DOJ filed Petition for A Writ of Certiorari.

The DOJ is also asking for a stay against the Circuit Court’s ruling until the United States Supreme Court can decide whether to grant certiorari. The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals en banc ruled 13-3 in favor of Cargill. The court remanded the case back to the District Court to rule in favor of Cargill and issue appropriate relief on 01-06-2023.

“By ruling 13-3 in our favor, the Fifth Circuit reinforced the principle that the laws are to be written by Congress, not federal administrators. And if the Supreme Court agrees to hear the case, we are confident that it will uphold the Fifth Circuit’s decision,” says Michael Cargill.

Under our constitutional system, Congress makes the laws, not the Department of Justice or the ATF.

Congress has banned “machine guns” but it has not banned bump stocks. Agencies like DOJ and ATF can’t just assume the power to rewrite the law, or our constitutional system and separation of powers with checks and balances will disappear.

For years, the ATF said that bump stocks were not machine guns under the law. Now it is saying the opposite, which means that hundreds of thousands of law-abiding Americans who relied on the ATF’s approval of bump stocks are suddenly felons. That’s not how the law in America should work.

Whether to ban bump stocks is a question—and a responsibility—that lies with Congress, not agencies like DOJ and the ATF. If agencies take over that decision, our government is no longer accountable to the people.
pk47
OFCC Patron Member
OFCC Patron Member
Posts: 191
Joined: Fri Aug 12, 2016 4:36 pm
Location: NE Ohio

Re: Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Post by pk47 »

Bureaucrats are truly enemies of the people when they learn they are not accountable.
bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

Re: Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Post by bignflnut »

Yea, Verily, Biden Administration and Trump Administration have found common ground!

Remember Trump's reaction to the Vegas shooting which NECESSITATED this ban on his watch:
"In moments of tragedy and horror," Trump said, the nation "comes together as one." He continued, "Our unity cannot be shattered by evil; our bonds cannot be broken by violence."
The official story of the Vegas shooting has recently been released:
Those interviewed by the FBI described Paddock as a “strange” introvert who never made eye contact and only wanted to talk about gambling, while the gunman’s fellow gambler told the FBI that Paddock was “very upset” that the red-carpet treatment for high rollers seemed to be fading.
Dangerous plastic banned to save us all.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
Bearable
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 9:32 pm
Location: South of I-70

Re: Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Post by Bearable »

Here is the government's petition to the supreme court.
https://nclalegal.org/wp-content/upload ... inal-1.pdf

The government's argument is:
In the decision below, the en banc Fifth Circuit held that the ATF rule was unlawful because the statutory definition of “machinegun” does not encompass bump stocks. The question presented is as follows:
Whether a bump stock device is a “machinegun” as defined in 26 U.S.C. 5845(b) because it is designed and intended for use in converting a rifle into a machinegun, i.e., into a weapon that fires “automatically more than one shot * * * by a single function of the trigger.”

Fifth Circuit Ruled:
https://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/p ... 16-CV2.pdf
The definition of “machinegun” as set forth in the National Firearms Act and Gun Control Act does not apply to bump stocks. And if there were any doubt as to this conclusion, we conclude that the statutory definition is ambiguous, at the very least. The rule of lenity therefore compels us to construe the statute in Cargill’s favor. Either way, we must REVERSE.

The Appeals court, in effect, is saying the definition of machinegun is not ambiguous, but the definition of bump stock is ambiguous.

The problem is the government is arguing that an object not physically connected to the trigger can change the physical operation of the trigger itself.

If you believe that, I have a bridge I would like to sell you.
M-Quigley
Posts: 4782
Joined: Wed Jun 24, 2015 10:06 pm
Location: Western Ohio

Re: Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Post by M-Quigley »

I just noticed a glaring error in the ammoland link, when it said
Congress has banned “machine guns” but it has not banned bump stocks.
Congress never "banned" machine guns, they imposed a registration scheme and a $200 tax that, at the time only rich people could afford.
In 1986 a law was passed that prohibited the manufacture of "fully transferable" machine gun receivers, (basically receivers that could be transferred to individuals instead of dealer sample or sold to the police or military) This caused the asking price of fully transferable machine guns to go up and up to the point where, despite inflation, machine gun purchases are now back to being a toy for the wealthy again.

There are certain states where ownership of fully automatic weapons but Ohio is not one of them, and there are many people in Ohio who legally own one or more.
Brian D.
Posts: 16229
Joined: Mon Jul 04, 2005 8:42 pm
Location: SW Ohio

Re: Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Post by Brian D. »

M-Quigley wrote: Sat Apr 22, 2023 11:52 pm I just noticed a glaring error in the ammoland link, when it said
Congress has banned “machine guns” but it has not banned bump stocks.
Congress never "banned" machine guns, they imposed a registration scheme and a $200 tax that, at the time only rich people could afford.
In 1986 a law was passed that prohibited the manufacture of "fully transferable" machine gun receivers, (basically receivers that could be transferred to individuals instead of dealer sample or sold to the police or military) This caused the asking price of fully transferable machine guns to go up and up to the point where, despite inflation, machine gun purchases are now back to being a toy for the wealthy again.

There are certain states where ownership of fully automatic weapons but Ohio is not one of them, and there are many people in Ohio who legally own one or more.
Ammoland should be better than that. But it's not shocking to me or anything.
Quit worrying, hide your gun well, shut up, and CARRY that handgun!

********************************************************************************
1911 and Browning Hi Power Enthusianado.
Bearable
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 9:32 pm
Location: South of I-70

Re: Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Post by Bearable »

The Sixth Circuit just shot down the ATF bump stock ruling. "Simply put, under the statute as it currently reads, the addition of a bump stock to a rifle clearly does not make it a machinegun." Concurring Judgment.

https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinio ... 86p-06.pdf
bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

Re: Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Post by bignflnut »

6th Circuit is Michigan, Ohio, Kentucky, Tennessee...so, there.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
User avatar
JustaShooter
OFCC Coordinator
OFCC Coordinator
Posts: 5800
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2013 3:08 pm
Location: Akron/Canton Area

Re: Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Post by JustaShooter »

Now we have two Circuit Courts overturning the ban, and two upholding it. The stage is set for SCOTUS review.
Christian, Husband, Father
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified Range Safety Officer
NRA Certified Pistol & Rifle Instructor

Want to become more active with OFCC and help fight for your rights? Click Here!
Bearable
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 9:32 pm
Location: South of I-70

Re: Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Post by Bearable »

On April 21, I said this:
The problem is the government is arguing that an object not physically connected to the trigger can change the physical operation of the trigger itself.
On April 25, Judge Bush said, in his concurring opinion, this:
A bump stock does nothing to impact the internal mechanics of a rifle to circumvent the need for the trigger to reset between every shot, so a bump-stock- equipped rifle is still capable of shooting only one shot with each function of the trigger.
One could say "Great minds think alike, though fools seldom differ." But, it has nothing to do with opinions. It has to do with basic physics.
User avatar
skylinechiliboi
Posts: 47
Joined: Fri Aug 21, 2020 4:01 am
Location: Ohio

Re: Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Post by skylinechiliboi »

This is promising news.
It's not about the object (the bump stock) as it is over the principle of the issue.
it took me a while to understand this concept when I was younger, as I dont care about bump stocks, but now fully understand and support the sentiment.
bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

Re: Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Post by bignflnut »

JustaShooter wrote: Wed Apr 26, 2023 1:18 pm Now we have two Circuit Courts overturning the ban, and two upholding it. The stage is set for SCOTUS review.
IF there are 4 votes to review it. Thomas, Alito, ????

The line between skepticism and cynicism is sometimes imperceptible...

Stock Wars era of RKBA restrictions at SCOTUS, braces and bump stocks: Things behind the receiver for 40 million.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
User avatar
BB62
Posts: 2601
Joined: Thu Jul 07, 2005 12:57 pm
Location: Cincinnati, OH

Re: Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Post by BB62 »

In related news, the USSC has accepted a case, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which challenges the "Chevron doctrine", a doctrine giving deference to government agency's rule-making authority which ends up with them essentially creating law all by themselves.

This has led to such things as bump stock bans, stock/brace rules, etc. by the ATF and various other things by various other (FDA, EPA, etc) executive agencies.

My prediction is that Chevron is going to be curtailed. I can't imagine it will be abandoned entirely.

https://krcrtv.com/news/nation-world/su ... rican-life
Yes, I do believe in open carry. An openly armed man is clear in his intentions. Concealed carriers are sneaks and skulkers and elitist, boot licking, political contribution making, running dog lackies of The Man. <wink> (thx grumpycoconut - OpenCarry.org)

Got Freedom?

Accountant, Computer & Management Consultant
Scuba Diver, NRA Life Member, NRA Instructor
Bearable
Posts: 124
Joined: Fri Dec 21, 2018 9:32 pm
Location: South of I-70

Re: Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Post by Bearable »

In West Virginia v. Environmental Protection Agency, 597 U.S. ___ (2022) the USSC ruled that:

"A decision of such magnitude and consequence rests with Congress itself, or an agency acting pursuant to a clear delegation from that representative body."

In other words, congress must write the laws not an agency. In effect, walking back the Chevron doctrine.

We shall see how far the court will peel back the Chevron doctrine.
bignflnut
Volunteer
Volunteer
Posts: 8135
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 12:14 pm
Location: Under Naybob Tinfoil Bridge
Contact:

Re: Just when you thought a topic has run it's course, surprise! Bump stock ban appeal by Garland

Post by bignflnut »

BB62 wrote: Mon May 01, 2023 7:37 pm In related news, the USSC has accepted a case, Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, which challenges the "Chevron doctrine", a doctrine giving deference to government agency's rule-making authority which ends up with them essentially creating law all by themselves.

This has led to such things as bump stock bans, stock/brace rules, etc. by the ATF and various other things by various other (FDA, EPA, etc) executive agencies.

My prediction is that Chevron is going to be curtailed. I can't imagine it will be abandoned entirely.

https://krcrtv.com/news/nation-world/su ... rican-life
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLeaUnXq2HI

This video blogger thinks N Gorsuch is another vote to overturn Chevron.
In the past six years, agencies lost 70 percent of Supreme Court cases that addressed Chevron, Cato found. Instead, the high court increasingly “has been applying the rules of statutory interpretation even more closely,” Cato wrote. That includes last year’s ruling in West Virginia v. EPA, which strengthened and for the first time named the “major questions” doctrine as a way to strike down regulations.

The lower courts, however, continue to apply Chevron since it is still Supreme Court precedent. In 2020 and 2021, Cato found 142 rulings involving Chevron. Agencies won almost 60 percent of the time in those cases, Cato said.

Some judges have already found ways to reach “outcome-oriented decisions,” argued CPR’s Goodwin. Releasing the lower courts from having to apply Chevron could accelerate that trend.

“I think it does free up activist judges to base their review of regulations upon their policy preferences,” Goodwin said.

Undoing the Chevron doctrine would also throw a wrench into Congress’ legislative agenda. In recent decades, lawmakers have increasingly chosen to draft broad guidelines and delegate the technical details to the agencies. Supporters of Chevron deference say it’s appropriate to give agency experts breathing space to craft granular policies to respond to problems that Congress might not anticipate or fully understand. Critics contend that shifting so much policymaking power to bureaucrats violates the separation of powers.
One wonders if the massive "public safety" play of shutting down America for weeks on end (during Trump's Administration) doesn't shed a new light on what "can't happen in America" - even in the high offices of SCOTUS.

Idk if it would be as big a deal as Dobbs, but would certainly be a major feather in the cap for fuh-wwee-dom.
“It’s not that we don’t have enough scoundrels to curse; it’s that we don’t have enough good men to curse them.”–G.K. Chesterton-Illustrated London News, 3-14-1908

Republicans.Hate.You. See2020.

"Avarice, ambition, revenge and licentiousness would break the strongest cords of our Constitution, as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." John Adams to Mass Militia 10-11-1798
Post Reply