Supreme Court to weigh legality of Biden administration's ghost guns rule
Source: CBS News
Updated on: October 7, 2024 / 2:16 PM EDT
Washington The Supreme Court will convene Tuesday to consider a challenge to the Biden administration's efforts to regulate untraceable firearms known as ghost guns, as major American cities report the measure seems to have caused a reduction in the use of these weapons within their borders. The court fight involves a 2022 regulation from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives that sought to ensure the difficult-to-trace weapons known as ghost guns are subject to the same requirements as commercial firearms sales.
The issue before the justices is not whether Second Amendment rights were violated, but rather if the Biden administration went too far when it issued the rule. The case may sound similar to one before the high court in its last term that involved a ban on bump stocks put in place during the Trump administration. In that instance, the Supreme Court's conservative majority invalidated the regulation that outlawed the devices, finding that the ATF exceeded its authority by issuing a rule that classified a bump stock as a "machine gun."
But legal experts say the Supreme Court's ruling four months ago may not be a harbinger of whether the ghost gun regulation will fall, and in this case, Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney Barrett, two members of the court's conservative wing, will be the key members to watch.
"The government has a much stronger case here that the products the challengers are selling should be covered under a plain reading of the Gun Control Act," said David Pucino, deputy chief counsel and legal director at Giffords Law Center, which is urging the Supreme Court to uphold the rule. "The products are readily convertible into firearms."
Read more: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/supreme-court-legality-biden-ghost-guns-rule/
JoseBalow
(5,178 posts)Prairie Gates
(3,061 posts)AZ8theist
(6,491 posts)niyad
(119,939 posts)Polybius
(17,844 posts)Immunity just means that a President can't be prosecuted for official acts. His executive orders can still be challenged and struck down.
niyad
(119,939 posts)Polybius
(17,844 posts)The ruling means that a President is immune from prosecution and can't get in any trouble for an official act. They can still be struck down though, it's as clear as a bell.
niyad
(119,939 posts)covers executive orders. Thanks in advance
Polybius
(17,844 posts)It says nothing about executive orders being absolute. In fact, some of Biden's have been struck down by the very Court that decided that Presidents have immunity from official acts. It's doesn't make a President a monarch.
sakabatou
(43,064 posts)However, I could also see the ruling saying it comes down to the ATF, not the president.
dchill
(40,476 posts)Supreme Court to DECIDE legality... using the best conservative principles money can buy.
bahboo
(16,953 posts)just get rid of all gun regulations....arm everybody with anything. Then we'll be safer, right....good fucking christ almighty....