The Supreme Court shot down a Trump-era bump stock ban on Friday morning.
The court was split 6-3 along ideological lines, with liberal justices voting against lifting the ban and conservatives unanimously voting for it.
In the majority opinion, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote that a bump stock does not meet the definition of "machinegun" under federal law.
“Semiautomatic firearms, which require shooters to reengage the trigger for every shot, are not machineguns,” Justice Thomas wrote. “This case asks whether a bump stock—an accessory for a semiautomatic rifle that allows the shooter to rapidly reengage the trigger (and therefore achieve a high rate of fire)—converts the rifle into a ‘machinegun.’ We hold that it does not and therefore affirm.”
Justice Thomas explained, "Nothing changes when a semiautomatic rifle is equipped with a bump stock.”
“The firing cycle remains the same,” Thomas continued. “Between every shot, the shooter must release pressure from the trigger and allow it to reset before re-engaging the trigger for another shot.”
Justice Samuel Alito added in his opinion, “There is a simple remedy for the disparate treatment of bump stocks and machineguns. Congress can amend the law—and perhaps would have done so already if ATF had stuck with its earlier interpretation.”
Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson wrote in their dissent that the ruling “will have deadly consequences.”
"When I see a bird that walks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, I call that bird a duck," Sotomayor asserted.
The case was brought by the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA).
In a statement about the decision, NCLA President Mark Chenoweth wrote, "NCLA is delighted that the Court has vindicated our client’s position that ATF does not have the power to rewrite criminal laws. The statute Congress passed did not ban bump stocks, and ATF does not have the power to do so on its own. This result is completely consistent with the Constitution’s assignment of all legislative power to Congress. Bump-stock opponents should direct any views at Congress, not the Court, which faithfully applied the statute in front of it."
