This definition is central to the case as those challenging the decision contend that bump stocks do not fit this criterion. Cargill, the outcome hinges on whether the justices will ascertain whether the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has the authority to criminalize bump stocks based on their interpretation of the 1968 Gun Control Act.įor context, federal law has banned machine guns since 1934, and the Gun Control Act of 1968 provides a definition, categorizing them as weapons that automatically discharge more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger. In the case presently under Supreme Court review, Garland v. The Trump-era policy prohibiting bump stocks became effective in 2019 after the Supreme Court declined to block it. The shooter used bump stocks on 14 firearms, causing a horrific initial toll of 58 fatalities and over 400 injuries in less than 10 minutes. The Trump administration moved to ban them in 2018, a response to a devastating mass shooting during a Las Vegas music festival. WASHINGTON (TND) - The Supreme Court resumed its sessions over a month ago and, in a recent development, decided to review a Trump-era ban on bump stocks.īump stocks are devices that enable semi-automatic weapons to simulate automatic fire, and they have been legal until recent years.

Gun lake casino suit