The U.S. Supreme Court announced on Friday that oral arguments for its upcoming case involving the government’s ban on so-called “ghost guns” will begin on Oct. 8. It is the lone gun-related challenge on the court’s fall docket.

The case, VanDerStok v. Garland, challenges the Department of Justice’s 2022 Final Rule that redefined important legal terms dealing with guns, including “firearm,” “receiver” and “frame,” making the longstanding American tradition of building personal firearms pretty much a thing of the past. Back in April, the court voted 4-3 to consider the challenge.

At issue is whether the DOJ and Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) overstepped their bounds in promulgating the Final Rule. Plaintiffs in the case argue that the rule is just another example of the bureaucrat-run agencies ignoring the Administrative Procedures Act (APA) and overstepping their bounds by making laws instead of enforcing them.

That was, in fact, what the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals unanimously ruled last November, upholding an earlier district court decision on the matter. In the ruling, Judge Kurt Engelhardt, who wrote the majority opinion, agreed in no uncertain terms that ATF overstepped its bounds in making the Final Rule.

“ATF, in promulgating its Final Rule, attempted to take on the mantle of Congress to ‘do something’ with respect to gun control,” Judge Engelhardt, a Donald Trump nominee, wrote in the opinion. “But it is not the province of an executive agency to write laws for our nation. That vital duty, for better or for worse, lies solely with the legislature.”

Judge Engelhardt further wrote that the Final Rule “flouts clear statutory text” and “exceeds the legislatively imposed limits” on agency authority.

“Because Congress has neither authorized the expansion of firearm regulation nor permitted the criminalization of previously lawful conduct, the proposed rule constitutes unlawful agency action, in direct contravention of the legislature’s will,” the judge wrote. “Unless and until Congress acts to expand or alter the language of the Gun Control Act, ATF must operate within the statutory text’s existing limits.”

The lawsuit was brought by the Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) on behalf of itself, two individual FPC members and Tactical Machining LLC. A brief filed last month by the FPC spelled out what the court needs to decide.

“The questions presented are: 1. Whether ‘a weapon parts kit that is designed to or may readily be completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise converted to expel a projectile by the action of an explosive,’ is a ‘firearm’ regulated by the Act,” the brief stated. “2. Whether ‘a partially complete, disassembled, or nonfunctional frame or receiver’ that is ‘designed to or may readily be completed, assembled, restored, or otherwise converted to function as a frame or receiver,’ is a ‘frame or receiver’ regulated by the Act.”

Biden-Harris gun-ban schemes have been taking a beating in the courts lately, and the Supreme Court has been no exception. Hopefully this will be yet another in a long line of pro-gun victories.

 

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

40 COMMENTS

    • Lawsuits are in progress to force all slave states to allow silences, short-barrelled shotguns, and machine guns in Illinois, and all slave states…

  2. A lot of this crap was self inflicted by the bozos who approved advertising 80% kits as, “Untraceable.” Gun Control zealots said thank you very much and took that and ran with it. Now it is in the hands of 9 justices with Thomas being the only one who would not look like a buffoon sitting a plow tractor, etc.

        • “Did what?”

          Seriously???

          “A lot of this crap was self inflicted by the bozos who approved advertising 80% kits as, “Untraceable.””

          Thank God above they are untraceable, that will make the job of them going door-to-door confiscating them a whole lot harder.

          This is a very risky case, there is a very real danger the Court could declare universal gun registration is legal and constitutional.

          I really hope Thomas et.al recognize the need for anonymous gun possession, that will do more than anything else to keep this nation freer from fascism.

          When the government is in fear of the people they rule, there is freedom. When the people fear the government, there is totalitarianism, I really hope Thomas understands that, and rules accordingly…

        • Rapidly expanded the hobby and increased distribution of less easily registerable firearms with less overall paper records for initial point of sale all while coming to a head with a conservative leaning court that just slapped down various elements at play in this pending case.

          • I really hope Thomas et.al recognize the need for anonymous gun possession, that will do more than anything else to keep this nation freer from fascism.

            When the government is in fear of the people they rule, there is freedom. When the people fear the government, there is totalitarianism, I really hope Thomas understands that, and rules accordingly…

          • I really hope Thomas et.al recognize the need for anonymous gun possession, that will do more than anything else to keep this nation freer from evil leftists…

          • “Rapidly expanded the hobby and increased distribution of less easily registerable firearms with less overall paper records for initial point of sale…”

      • racer…Many moons ago 80% were advertised as untracable on this site. Way back then I responded to the stupidy of using untraceable as a sales pitch…you should get out more often.

        • You should get out more often deb, like over here to see if the sparks of passion fly… 🙂

        • MOST guns are untraceable, all it takes is one face to face sale. After ten years, the ability to follow who owned the firearm is hampered by the lack of documents.

          And that is a good thing, as tracing a firearm rarely if ever solves a crime. It only appropriates the power of people exercising their Rights to dispose of their property and inserts official .Gov approval. For evidence, look at car titles. That was a ingenious way to remove our rights and force us to conform to regulations and laws that take away our rights and turn them into privileges.

          That the .Gov would become irritated with us and attempt to impose more control over us should be considered a given in the current 50 trend. Selling “untraceable” 80% lowers didn’t prompt the ATF to suddenly wake up to a major criminal trafficking effort, they would have come after them anyway. It was a longstanding effort on their part, starting with the ’34 NFA, and exploiting the assassination of Kennedy resulting in the ’68 GCA. Both are great examples of .Gov overreach – the ’34 NFA started as a handgun confiscation and ban on ownership.

          “Untraceable” wasn’t a major impetus, it was just convenient for their purposes. If not that, something else would have been created out of thin air, like, that thingy that goes up, or high powered, or high capacity, all of which are simply features, not evil. Imputing a moral characteristic onto an inanimate object is their gambit and how they exploit the issue against us. We should avoid that and stop giving them ammunition,.

          • Might have been one or two that did out of a dozen or so but ultimately so what it’s legal.

        • They were advertised as “untraceable” and “ghost” guns by the loud mouth left in Government, and they are probably the best salesmen, as Obama was for AR-15 style weapons. Every time a Politician says Assault weapon, weapon of war 1,000 scary semi-auto rifles are sold. That’s where nearly every one I know learned of 80% lowers. In the 1700 hundreds my family was instrumental in starting Henry Rifles. To this day there are still rifle parts that are found in old barns, summer kitchens, and smokehouses. Area residents would be recruited to help file actions when demand increased and labor was short. Firearm building is what America was built on. Maybe teaching some history would help.

      • We do not need to be giving the left any ammunition and that includes vocabulary. It is best to avoid using terms such as: assault rifle, gun violence, ghost guns and yes untraceable. These are words the left will use against POTG. It is not a matter of “rights”, but rather a matter of playing it smart. Consider the left already wants micro stamping and they despise the idea of “ghost guns”. Referring to any thing using the terms the left abhors is just not a good idea considering there are so many ways to avoid those awful words that terrifies the left. Ghost guns and untraceable are synonyms to the left and they are terrified at the thought of anyone having a gun that cannot be traced. Hence, words do matter and using certain words the left sees triggers them to action that POTG does not want or deserve.

        • No we are well past the point of that mattering. 20 years ago sure but we are at the knife fight in the phone booth phase of the gun rights issue.

        • I agree. On my gun building forum, I’ve programmed it to automatically replace the word “g h o s t” with 👻. I don’t want my forum showing up in the google search results for that word.

  3. Whether you’re a builder or not… This is a case we need to win.

    Privately made firearms (PMFs) have been legal and part of American culture since the birth of the nation.

    • “Privately made firearms (PMFs) have been legal and part of American culture since the birth of the nation.”

      Exactly, that’s what will make watching the oral arguments ‘must-see TV’, so to speak…

  4. Well here’s hoping SCOTUS will grow a spine, for once, and rule broadly enough to strike down all bans on home made weapons. But sadly I’m not going to bet on it.

  6. Why the F are all my comments going into moderation? Did someone forget to take their Midol?

    • Not sure man. I’ll ask our tech people to look. You’ve definitely tripped some trigger because all your comments are in pending and none of them have any issue that I can see.

  7. BREAKING 2A NEWS: DOJ MAKES TERRIBLE ARGUMENT AGAINST 2ND AMENDMENT IN FEDERAL COURT.

    In the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York City, Biden’s Department of Justice has taken an interesting position in its attempt to cut back on Second Amendment rights. Mark Smith Four Boxes Diner explains.

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wo_QseFEGBU

  11. When the Chevron decision behind us the SCOTUS review of agency overstep should be an interesting one. A number of Blue states will be holding their breath.

    • Unless they made hunks of shaped aluminum illegal by statute then it’s a separate lawsuit.

  12. As a Machinist, I find this almost amusing.
    Almost.
    Ghost gun…. what a term.
    I look around my shop, I see endless opportunity to make all sorts of firearms.
    From something that goes bang, to precision rifle.
    However, I haven’t any such inclination. And it is far too time consuming as opposed to buying a piece off the shelf.
    Thing is, I know several who have, and with only the most menial tools.
    And I have seen some impressive specimens.
    And, it is in our History. This is no magic feat.
    As Americans, we know there are just a few ways to get firearms.
    Buy one. Make one. Be given one.
    The only exception is theft.
    Our Government seems inclined to eliminate the former.
    We sure can’t lay down and take it.
    I don’t see where hunting or sport is alluded to in the second amendment, handed down by our Creator.

  15. Go to the CourtVictim.com website, read my paper there about the UNIVERSAL Get Out Of Jail For Free Card, and then tell me where I am wrong in it and why! In a nutshell, if the USSC/SCOTUS was not able to issue a correct decision on Roe v. Wade in 1973, and had to reverse it in 2022 by merely calling it an egregious mistake, how can we expect it to render a correct decision on ANY subject??

Comments are closed.