The Supreme Court upheld the Biden administration’s regulation of “ghost guns” in a 7-2 decision Wednesday, rejecting a challenge brought by gun rights groups and several manufacturers.
The future of the crackdown remains hazy, however, as the new Trump administration directs a review of all Biden-era firearm regulations and could look to rescind the restrictions.
But for now, the Supreme Court kept intact efforts by the Biden-era Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to combat ghost guns, which are sold as do-it-yourself kits and difficult to trace, in response to an exploding number seized in crimes.
The Supreme Court’s ruling in Bondi v. VanDerStok jeopardizes the time-honored tradition of making one’s own means of self-defense, and sets a dangerous precedent of allowing federal agencies to overstep their authority with no consequences. Our client, Jennifer VanDerStok, is a former law enforcement officer who simply has a hobby of building firearms at her home. Now the ATF might consider her a criminal.
But a court ruling does not end this fight. Under President Trump’s Executive Order 14206 which commits the Executive Branch to defending Second Amendment-protected rights, the ATF can address this decision by modifying and repealing the Biden-Harris regulations enacted by the ATF. We strongly urge Attorney General Bondi to reconsider these regulations.
The majority opinion in Bondi v. VanDerStok was written by Justice Neil Gorsuch. But notably, Justice Gorsuch wrote that the Court’s logic “has limits,” and that the Court is not deciding which firearms parts kits count as firearms, and which ones don’t. Unfortunately, that leaves the law ambiguous for ordinary Americans.
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Thomas wrote, “The statutory terms “frame” and “receiver” do not cover the unfinished frames and receivers contained in weapon-parts kits, and weapon-parts kits themselves do not meet the statutory definition of “firearm.” That should end the case. The majority instead blesses the Government’s overreach based on a series of errors regarding both the standard of review and the interpretation of the statute. I respectfully dissent.”
Justice Thomas is correct. This ruling sets a precedent that could undermine the constitutional rights of American citizens, and creates a landscape that encourages government overreach.
MSLF’s Center to Keep & Bear Arms Director Michael McCoy said, “We are disappointed with the Court’s ruling but not defeated by it. The fight continues on multiple fronts to protect not only our Second Amendment rights but the time-honored and critically important principle of separation of powers. The ATF must revisit the vague and restrictive regulations enacted by the Biden-Harris Administration.”