(Joshua Paladino, Headline USA) State attorneys general appealed to the Supreme Court to overturn a federal rule that would ban bump stocks without congressional approval, Just the News reported.
The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives passed a rule that outlaws bump stocks. The ATF argued that bump stocks violate the National Firearms Act of 1934 because they turn semi-automatic rifles into de facto machine guns.
Hundreds of thousands of Americans who use bump stocks would become criminals overnight if the courts allow the regulation to take effect.
Proponents argue that bump stocks, also called stabilizing braces, strap onto a shooter’s firearm to improve accuracy, stability, and safety. Opponents say that the braces are intended to increase a weapon’s rate of fire.
Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen and West Virgina Attorney General Patrick Morrisey, both Republicans, are leading the lawsuit. Twenty more state attorneys general have signed onto the complaint.
“The Final Rule effectively transforms commonly owned firearms into banned machine guns simply because of the use of non-mechanical bump-stock accessories,” the AGs argued. “This interpretation categorically expands the text of the criminal statute in a way that Congress couldn’t possibly have intended.”
Former President Donald Trump ordered the ATF to ban bump stocks in 2018, but the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the 1934 law does not cover the firearm accessory.
“And it expands criminal liability at the expense of Second Amendment rights, diminishing the latter absent a sufficient and compelling justification,” the AGs stated. “When the ATF – or any agency – invades protected rights by interpreting statutes too broadly, this Court should step in.”
Knudsen said the case has to do with more than the 2nd Amendment.
“The significance of this case goes beyond any firearm accessory and gun rights. No federal agency should be able to create criminal code without Congressional authorization,” he said.
“The Supreme Court must take up this important case to uphold the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment and affirm this important check on the federal executive’s power.”
