Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Biden 'Ghost Gun' Rule

Supreme Court to Hear Challenge to Biden 'Ghost Gun' Rule

The high court previously reversed lower court orders blocking the regulation of
guns that can be assembled at home.

The Supreme Court agreed on April 22 to consider the Biden administration's rule
regulating so-called ghost guns that can be assembled at home.

Oral arguments in the high-profile case are likely to take place in the fall.

In October 2023, the Supreme Court reinstated the rule, which lower courts had
enjoined.

"Ghost gun" is a pejorative term used by gun control advocates to describe a
homemade firearm that lacks a serial number and therefore can't be tracked by
law enforcement.

Although some states regulate homemade guns, gun control groups have been trying
for years to ban or regulate homemade guns at the federal level but have failed
to persuade the U.S. Congress to act.

President Joe Biden has claimed that privately made guns, which are often made
with gun kits, are the "weapons of choice for many criminals."

The government's "frame or receiver" rule dates to April 2022. It requires
individuals who assemble homemade firearms to add serial numbers to them. The
rule also mandates background checks for consumers who buy gun-assembly kits
from dealers.

Pieces of guns that are shipped are nonetheless guns subject to existing laws,
the government argues.

The Supreme Court granted the petition for certiorari, or review, in Garland v.
Vanderstok in an unsigned order. No justices dissented.

The Firearms Policy Coalition (FPC) and FPC Action Foundation (FPCAF) brought
the lawsuit challenging the "frame or receiver" rule that is being implemented
by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).

"FPC and our members look forward to the end of President Biden's
unconstitutional and abusive rule. We are delighted that the Supreme Court will
hear our case and decide this important issue once and for all," FPC founder and
President Brandon Combs said in a statement.

A lower court decision in the case blocking the rule "was correct and now that
victory can be applied to the entire country."

"This is an important day for the entire liberty movement. By agreeing to hear
our case, the Supreme Court will have the opportunity to put ATF firmly in its
place and stop the agency from unconstitutionally expanding its gun control
agenda," said FPC Action Foundation President Cody J. Wisniewski, who acts as
counsel for the plaintiffs in the case.

"We look forward to addressing this unlawful rule in the court's next term," he
added.

On Oct. 16, 2023, the Supreme Court issued an injunction in Garland v. Blackhawk
Manufacturing Group Inc. allowing the Biden administration to enforce the rule
regulating guns.

Before that, Justice Samuel Alito had administratively stayed a Sept. 14, 2023,
order of U.S. Judge Reed O'Connor of the U.S. District Court for the Northern
District of Texas that blocked the rule. On July 5, Judge O'Connor entered an
injunction after finding that the regulation violated existing law.

The judge found that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives
(ATF), which is part of the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), went beyond its
statutory jurisdiction in regulating "partially manufactured firearm components,
related firearm products, and other tools and materials."

The rule "is unlawful agency action," the judge found at that time.

On July 24, 2023, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit denied the
government's request to stay the lower court's order blocking the rule "because
the ATF has not demonstrated a strong likelihood of success on the merits, nor
irreparable harm in the absence of a stay."

The issue came before the Supreme Court on Aug. 8, 2023, when a 5-4 split on the
nation's highest court allowed the government's rule on ghost guns to remain in
place while an appeal of the injunction was pending in the 5th Circuit.

Four conservative justices-Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch, and
Brett Kavanaugh-dissented from the decision.

Two conservatives-Chief Justice John Roberts and Justice Amy Coney
Barrett-joined the court's three liberals-Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan,
and Ketanji Brown Jackson-in voting to allow the rule to remain in effect for
the time being.

Then on Sept. 14, 2023, Judge O'Connor issued an order narrowing his injunction
to cover 80 Percent Arms and Defense Distributed, two companies involved in the
litigation, along with their customers.

The Justice Department told the 5th Circuit that the district judge was ignoring
the Supreme Court's order.

On Oct. 2, 2023, the 5th Circuit issued a ruling indicating it disagreed with
the DOJ's contention but also found that the injunction "sweeps too broadly."

"Injunctions that afford relief to non-parties are potentially problematic. And
it appears the district court's injunction sweeps too broadly insofar as it
affords relief to non-party customers."

Nevertheless, the court found, "The party-plaintiff manufacturers would be
irreparably harmed by being forced to shut down their companies or by being
arrested pending judicial review of the Final Rule."

Although it vacated the injunction as it applied to gun kit customers, the court
said it did so based on the Biden administration's assurances that it "will not
enforce the Final Rule against customers who purchase regulated 'frames or
receivers' and who are otherwise lawfully entitled to purchase firearms."

The circuit court also suggested Judge O'Connor could revisit the matter and
broaden his injunction should the administration break its promise not to
enforce the rule against customers.

"Of course, if circumstances change, the district court is free to narrowly
tailor injunctive relief to meet the changed circumstances," the 5th Circuit
stated.

"But as things stand today, the Government is correct that the injunction cannot
extend to non-party customers."

The circuit court added that the plaintiffs who brought the action against the
rule are "likely to succeed on the merits because the Final Rule is contrary to
law."

The Supreme Court did not explain its April 22 decision. At least four of the
nine justices must vote to grant a petition for it to move forward to the oral
argument stage.

https://www.theepochtimes.com/us/supreme-court-to-hear-challenge-to-biden-ghost-gun-rule-5634530