WASHINGTON, DC – The U.S. Supreme Court last week upheld federal restrictions on the sale and assembly of “ghost guns,” ruling 7-2 in favor of the Biden administration’s efforts to regulate kits that can easily be turned into untraceable firearms, according to the New York Times.
The decision marks a rare victory for gun regulation, especially from a court that has often been skeptical of such measures, reported the New York Times.
The case revolved around the administration’s 2022 rules that tightened access to so-called ghost gun kits, said the Times, noting these kits, which can be quickly assembled into firearms have increasingly been linked to criminal activity.
In writing for the majority, Justice Neil M. Gorsuch emphasized the ease of assembling these firearms, noted the Times, and illustrated the process with images of Polymer80’s “Buy Build Shoot” kit, noting that it could be put together in approximately 20 minutes to create a fully functional Glock-style semiautomatic weapon.
“Plainly, the finished ‘Buy Build Shoot’ kit is an instrument of combat,” Gorsuch wrote, rejecting arguments the kits could be classified as mere parts or toys, according to the New York Times.
The ruling follows growing concerns about ghost guns, which law enforcement agencies have reported being used in a significant rise in crimes, noted the Times.
Before the Biden administration’s regulatory measures, the use of these kits in crimes had increased tenfold over the past six years, according to the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF), as reported by the New York Times.
As part of the regulations, the Times added, vendors and gun makers must now be licensed to sell the kits, serial numbers are required on the components for tracking, and background checks are mandatory for buyers.
This decision signals a shift in the court’s approach to gun regulation, traditionally influenced by conservative interpretations of the Second Amendment, comments the New York Times, noting Justices Samuel A. Alito, Jr., and Clarence Thomas dissented, arguing that the kits did not qualify as firearms under the Gun Control Act of 1968.
Justice Thomas argued that unless an object was already a firearm, it should not be subject to regulation, suggesting that the kits could only be classified as weapons once fully assembled, wrote the Times.
Adam Winkler, a law professor at UCLA, described the ruling as a significant win for those advocating for more stringent gun regulations, in the Times story.
“Ghost guns have been found in increasing numbers at crime scenes, and today’s decision should help the problem,” Winkler stated in the New York Times.
In a statement, Steven M. Dettelbach, former director of the ATF, praised the decision, claiming in the NY Times, “Today’s ruling shows that regulation of ghost guns is not only necessary but also constitutional,” underscoring the importance of the Biden administration’s actions in curbing gun violence.
Gun rights advocates, however, maintain that the regulations are an overreach, noting the majority of people purchasing these kits are hobbyists, not criminals, as noted by the Times, adding the Supreme Court’s decision highlights the growing concerns over the accessibility of untraceable firearms and the need for tighter controls on such weapons in the fight against gun violence.
