Supreme Court to Examine Ghost Gun Regulations: Implications for Public Safety

Judge holding gavel at desk.

The Supreme Court is set to review the Biden administration’s new regulation on the rising issue of “ghost guns,” with potential implications for public safety, law enforcement, and federal authority.

At a Glance

  • Supreme Court is reviewing and seems likely to uphold the Biden administration’s ghost gun regulation.
  • Regulations apply serial numbers and background checks to ghost guns.
  • Gun rights groups challenge, saying ATF overstepped authority.
  • Decrease in crime scene recoveries since regulation enactment.
  • Outcome impacts the availability of ghost gun kits.

The Rise and Regulation of Ghost Guns

Ghost guns, untraceable firearms assembled from kits lacking serial numbers, have become a growing public safety concern. The Biden administration seeks to regulate these firearms by imposing requirements such as serial numbers and background checks, similar to traditional firearms. This move addresses the marked increase in ghost guns recovered at crime scenes, with figures nearing 20,000 in 2021. The regulations hold manufacturers and sellers accountable, requiring them to obtain licenses and conduct thorough background checks, thus closing a significant loophole in firearm laws.

Polymer80, a key manufacturer of such kits, temporarily ceased operations amid legal and regulatory pressures, marking a significant victory for gun control advocates. According to Elizabeth B. Preloger and others, in arguments to the court, just as companies selling disassembled furniture would still fall under furniture tax laws, companies selling firearm kits should adhere to firearm regulations, considering the intended outcome of these kits.

Legal Challenges and the Role of the ATF

The Biden administration’s regulations face challenges from gun rights groups and several states, arguing that the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives (ATF) lacks the authority to impose such rules without legislative backing. These groups suggest that the regulation of ghost guns oversteps the agency’s legal boundaries and raises questions about federal executive power over firearms. The Supreme Court previously allowed the regulation to remain during ongoing legal challenges, demonstrating its temporary approval of the measures enacted to curb ghost gun proliferation.

The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals’ decision to overturn the ATF’s ruling has prompted the Supreme Court to engage, focusing not directly on Second Amendment issues, but rather on the federal agency’s jurisdiction and legislative reach. The primary legal dispute is whether firearm parts kits meet the definition of firearms under the Gun Control Act of 1968.

Implications for Public Safety and Firearm Regulation

The outcome of the Supreme Court’s review in Garland v. VanDerStok could redefine how ghost guns are treated under federal law, greatly influencing their future availability. Law enforcement reports a notable decline in ghost guns found at crime scenes since the new rules took effect, indicating the regulations’ effectiveness in reducing these untraceable weapons’ circulation. Many fear that overturning these rules could potentially increase access to firearms for criminals, people with mental health issues, and teenagers.

If the Supreme Court sides with the Biden administration, it would affirm the ATF’s extended authority, potentially setting a precedent for addressing complex firearm manufacturing trends. Conversely, a ruling against the administration might constrain future regulatory efforts, leaving gaps exploited by those wishing to evade traditional gun control measures.

Sources:

  1. ‘Ghost Guns’ Case Before Supreme Court Has Major Implications for Industry in Flux
  2. The flood of ghost guns is slowing after regulation. It’s also being challenged in the Supreme Court

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR