Supreme Court to Reevaluate Mysterious Firearms Regulations

The Supreme Court is poised to revisit federal guidelines on ghost guns, igniting a debate around Second Amendment rights and public safety.

At a Glance

The Supreme Court temporarily revived the Biden administration’s regulation of “ghost guns.”
Ghost guns are kits that can be bought online and assembled into untraceable homemade firearms.
The regulation is part of President Biden’s broader effort to address gun violence.
Ghost guns are popular among criminals barred from buying ordinary guns.
The court’s order maintains the regulation while a legal challenge proceeds.

Supreme Court’s Provisional Order on Ghost Guns

The Supreme Court temporarily revived the Biden administration’s regulation of ghost guns, which can be assembled from kits or 3D-printed parts. These firearms typically lack serial numbers, making them hard to trace and posing challenges for law enforcement. This regulatory move is part of President Biden’s broader effort to address gun violence.

Regulations and Their Legal Journey

The regulation, issued in 2022 by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives, broadens the bureau’s interpretation of the Gun Control Act of 1968. The Court’s provisional order, secured by a 5-4 vote, maintains the regulation while legal challenges proceed. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito Jr., Neil Gorsuch, and Brett Kavanaugh dissented.

“In defending the rule, a key part of President Biden’s broader effort to address gun violence, administration officials said such weapons had soared in popularity in recent years, particularly among criminals barred from buying ordinary guns.” – The New York Times

Federal officials, including Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar, argued that easy access to untraceable firearms poses a significant danger to public safety. They emphasized the threat posed by ghost guns, especially among criminals and minors.

“Federal inaction has enabled individuals to circumvent state gun laws and bring unserialized weapons into the very states that have been trying to keep them out,” she argued.

Implications for Gun Control and Constitutional Law

The regulation’s supporters contend it is necessary to curb the rising use of ghost guns in crimes. Critics argue the rules infringe upon Second Amendment rights. The legal battles over these rules highlight the ongoing tension between public safety and constitutional freedoms. The case’s resolution could have extensive ramifications for gun control policies in the United States.

Ongoing Legal Proceedings

The broader implications of the case promise to be significant, touching on gun control, public safety, and constitutional law. Additionally, the Supreme Court will hear arguments on whether individuals with domestic violence restraining orders lose their gun rights in the upcoming case U.S. vs. Rahimi. This case does not involve the Second Amendment directly but underscores the practical implications of federal firearms regulations.