Physical Address
304 North Cardinal St.
Dorchester Center, MA 02124
The U.S. Supreme Court issued a decisive ruling on Wednesday, affirming the Biden administration’s regulation concerning so-called ghost guns by a vote of 7-2.
Justice Neil Gorsuch authored the opinion, receiving support from Chief Justice John Roberts and Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan, Brett Kavanaugh, Amy Coney Barrett, and Ketanji Brown Jackson. In opposition were Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel Alito, who dissented.
This ruling centered on the question of whether ghost guns qualify under the federal definitions of a firearm and its key components, namely the frame and receiver. Additionally, the Court considered the extent of authority awarded to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, often referred to as the ATF, in regulating and enforcing the sale of these devices.
Ghost guns are do-it-yourself weapons that can be easily assembled, often purchased online. They have been marketed by various sellers as accessible kits for assembly. According to the Justice Department, law enforcement seized over 19,000 of these untraceable firearms in 2021, reflecting an increase of more than tenfold in just five years.
This surge can be attributed to technological advancements, particularly the availability of polymer-based components that allow for the creation of unassembled firearms.
Home Assembly Process and Regulatory Implications
Typically, final assembly of a ghost gun involves readily available tools, including drills and sanders. These tools are necessary for creating the necessary holes and finishing the firearm frame or receiver to install the required parts. The Gun Control Act, initially established in 1968, underwent revisions in 2022 to address the rapidly growing market for specific kits that allow for building firearms at home.
The majority ruling of the seven justices determined that the Gun Control Act permits the ATF to regulate certain weapon parts kits and unfinished frames or receivers as firearms.
The law defines a firearm as any weapon designed to expel a projectile via explosive action, and this includes the frames or receivers of such weapons.
Justice Thomas, expressing his dissent, stated, “Congress could have authorized the ATF to regulate any part of a firearm or any object readily convertible into one. But it did not. I would adhere to the words Congress enacted. Using its novel ‘artifact noun’ methodology, the majority charts a different course that invites unforeseeable consequences and offers no limiting principle.”
The administration emphasized that the objective is not to ban the sale or use of ghost gun kits. Instead, the intention is to require compliance with existing regulations applicable to commercial firearms dealers. This compliance includes mandating serial numbers on the components and performing background checks on buyers.
A federal appeals court had previously invalidated these updated rules following challenges from sellers and buyers of ghost gun kits. However, the Justice Department escalated the matter to the Supreme Court to seek clarification.
Gun Rights Groups React
Groups advocating for gun rights argue that the ruling is unconstitutional and detrimental, asserting that ghost gun kits involve non-firearm objects. Furthermore, these devices can also be produced using 3D printers or assembled from individual components, constituting separate legal challenges currently unfolding in lower courts.
The ATF’s new regulation mandates that unfinished firearm parts, such as the frame of a handgun or receiver of a long gun, must be treated identically to completed firearms. These components now require licensing and serial numbers.
Manufacturers are also obligated to conduct background checks prior to selling these parts, which aligns with the existing requirements for conventional commercial firearms.
Ongoing Developments Related to Gun Laws
The justices have been revisiting the topic of the Second Amendment in recent times. In a landmark decision in 2022, the conservative majority made it easier for individuals to carry handguns in public for protective purposes. This debate remains central to various cases under consideration.
Notably, in June, the Court struck down a federal ban on bump stocks—devices capable of converting semi-automatic rifles into weapons that can unleash hundreds of rounds per minute. However, that same month witnessed the upholding of a federal prohibition against gun possession for individuals subjected to certain domestic violence restraining orders.
The recent case is recorded as Garland v. VanDerStok, No. 23-852, and it marks a pivotal moment in the ongoing dialogue surrounding firearm regulations and Second Amendment rights.
