Senior ligitation counsel at the New Civil Liberties Alliance Richard Samp weighs in on a new case on bump stocks.

Short Summary

1. Three years ago, owning a bump stock, a rifle accessory facilitating rapid firing, became a federal felony punishable by up to 10 years in prison.
2. The United States Supreme Court is considering the case of Garland versus Cargill, questioning the legality of bump stocks under federal statutes covering machine guns.
3. The dispute revolves around the definition of a machine gun, with the ATF interpreting the law following a mass shooting in Las Vegas in 2017.
4. The case argues that Congress should make changes to gun policy rather than allowing retroactive rule-making by the ATF.
5. The interpretation of the statute suggests that bump stocks do not convert a rifle into an automatic weapon but simply allow for more rapid firing of a semi-automatic weapon.
6. The Supreme Court justices have expressed varied opinions on the matter, with some showing sympathy towards the government’s position on banning dangerous weapons.
7. The decision is expected to be split, with conservative and liberal justices having differing views on the issue.
8. The speaker discusses the need for Congress to pass new legislation clarifying laws on machine guns and gun control, which has been a contentious issue.
9. Despite the lack of bipartisan support, it is seen as relatively easy for Congress to address.
10. The speaker mentions how Senator Dianne Feinstein criticized the Trump Administration’s attempt to change ATF policy on bump stocks, highlighting the division on the issue and suggesting that a court ruling could prompt Congressional action rather than relying on executive branch decisions.