Elkins45
Member
I know the ban has been ruled against in at least one Federal Circuit, maybe more. Does that have any practical significance, especially for people who live in those circuits?
What is the current legal status of bump stocks?
- Thread starter Elkins45
- Start date
N555
Member
Last I heard the ATF if ignoring the rulings and still pretending they're machine guns.
Old_Grouch
Member
The ATF would never try to act autonomously, would they?
mcb
Member
There has been no final rulings in any of the brace cases yet. Several judges have imposed injunctions against the brace regulation pending the outcome of the cases. Those injunctions have various scopes of who is protected but one of them it's a nation wide injunction covering everyone. The injuction means that law enforcement and the ATF cannot enforce this regulation until the court cases challenging it have been resolved. An injuction like this usually indicates that it the regulation is very like to be struck down by the court but there is no guarantee.
ETA: I completely misread the title as about braces and not bump stock, sorry about that.
ETA: I completely misread the title as about braces and not bump stock, sorry about that.
Last edited:
WestKentucky
Member
I like this. Factual, and pretty logical. One question to take this further though… assuming that the ban is upheld somehow, would a person who was found to be in “illegal possession” today be subject to prosecution at a later date? If the ban is overturned then it’s all water under the bridge, but if it’s upheld and a person just so happens to find or make a bumpstock today while the injunction is in place but has permanently disposed of it before the ruling is released, would they be subject to prosecution, or would they have to be found in noncompliance with the ban after the ruling before they are subject to prosecution?
This may be a really silly question covered by some standing law or legal jargon in the injunctions… I’m no lawyer, I’m just trying to understand the mess.
CapnMac
Member
And, that's why the Legal Forum tends to be strict about requiring citations of law rather than news stories or opinions, as those latter two can muddy understanding.
And, what makes this deep water for Legal, as this is a question that has no real text to cite, beyond the obscure language of Stays and the like.
The regulations exist in black & white, but the enforcement is prohibited, at least for the present. And, the fact that this one thing is tangled in over a dozen similar, and related lawsuits further complicates matters.
Not at all helped by the click-baiters inundating us with hyperbole at every turn.
mcb
Member
Very little and I completely miss read the title of this thread, sorry about that.
Guedes v BATFE is before the US Supreme Court and primary briefs have been submitted. US v Cargill is set for argument Feb 28, 2024. Although injunctions have been issued; the regulations have been adopted, the injunctions may or may not apply to you, and the injunctions could terminate at any time the court issues its decision.
Please resist the impulse to speculate or decide what the courts did or will do.
Please resist the impulse to speculate or decide what the courts did or will do.
LiveLife
Member
Bump stock rulings - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/atf-bump-stock-lawsuits.921442/#post-12731477
- 5th Circuit in January 2023 ruled against ATF in Cargill v Garland that ATF violated APA requirements (See OP)
- 6th Circuit in April 2023 ruled against ATF in Hardin v ATF that ATF went beyond legal authority (See OP)
- Appeals court of DC in August of 2022 ruled for ATF in Guedes v ATF that bump stocks were machine guns
5th Circuit ruling for Cargill - https://nclalegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/5th-Cir-en-banc-opinion.pdf
In defining the term machinegun, Congress referred to the mechanism by which the gun’s trigger causes bullets to be fired. Policy judgments aside, we are bound to apply that mechanical definition. And applying that definition to a semi-automatic rifle equipped with a non-mechanical bump stock,we conclude that such a weapon is not a machinegun for purposes of the Gun Control Act and National Firearms Act ... The Final Rule promulgated by the ATF violates the APA. We therefore REVERSE the judgment of the district court and REMAND with instructions to enter judgment for Cargill.
6th Circuit ruling for Hardin - https://www.opn.ca6.uscourts.gov/opinions.pdf/23a0086p-06.pdfJudge Ho’s concurrence in Cargill directs our attention to two persuasive analogies ... “Bump stocks may well be indistinguishable from automatic weapons for all practical purposes. But ... 'it would be dangerous ... to punish a crime not enumerated in the statute, because it is of equal atrocity, or of kindred character, with those which are enumerated.’” ... Because the relevant statutory scheme does not clearly and unambiguously prohibit bump stocks, we are bound to construe the statute in Hardin’s favor ... For all of the foregoing reasons, we REVERSE the judgment of the district court and REMAND for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
Supreme Court activity update - https://www.thehighroad.org/index.php?threads/atf-bump-stock-lawsuits.921442/#post-12805401
Last edited:
plainsdrifter
Member
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2021
- Messages
- 606
So did everyone who bought a bump stock notified by the ATF or is it all on yourself to dispose of it? Not sure how they would know unless they tracked them all down eh?
LiveLife
Member
"You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can be used against you in court ... you have the right to stop answering at any time."
Of course, I advocate being law abiding citizens and staying on the legal side of the law.
plainsdrifter
Member
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2021
- Messages
- 606
Yes well Miranda lived here in town so I know it well. But, that didn't answer my question as to how they would find out unless they grabbed records of transactions."You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can be used against you in court ... you have the right to stop answering at any time."
Of course, I advocate being law abiding citizens and staying on the legal side of the law.
This is the legal section, not the speculation section. If you want to assume you are invisible go ahead and see how that works for you, but please don't be suggesting violation of or disregard for laws governing these things.
Well, first there's a difference between doing things legally and getting away with committing a crime. And if one commits a crime he is betting his freedom, future, and fortune on not getting caught. And although it's true that some folks get away with committing a crime. the prisons are full of people who didn't.
Folks who commit crimes also can get discovered in all sorts of serendipitous ways. For example, Douglas Haig was discovered and successfully prosecuted for manufacturing ammunition without a license through evidence uncovered during the course of investigating a Las Vegas mass shooter.
plainsdrifter
Member
- Joined
- Jun 3, 2021
- Messages
- 606
Sir, that was a clear cut question about how the ATF works, not speculation or anything near suggesting people violate the law.
"How they would know" is not relevant to whether or not bump stocks are legal. Probing the limits of detection is not what we do here. If we can't seem to respond to the OP regarding the current state of the law, it is time to close this thread.
