Attorney General Merrick Garland plans to petition the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari to settle the Circuit Court split surrounding bump stocks.
The case Cargill v. Garland, in which Michael Cargill sued the Department of Justice (DOJ) for directing the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) to change its rule on bump stocks. The ATF would redesignate bump stocks to be machine guns even though the device did not meet the criteria laid out in the National Firearms Act of 1934 (NFA).
“It is going to put the ATF and the Department of Justice back in that little box,” plaintiff Michael Cargill, said of the case. “We need to start getting on the offensive with a lot of things.”
The decision to change the definition of a bump stock to a machine gun came after tragic events in Las Vegas, where over 50 people were murdered at a country music festival by a deranged madman. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) alleged that the shooter had an AR-15 equipped with a bump stock. Former President Donald Trump ordered the Department of Justice and Attorney General William Bar to ban the device.
The ATF submitted a new rule to the Federal Register for a public comment period. Although most comments were against the proposed rule, the government moved forward with the change. Thousands of Americans were told that they possessed illegal machine guns and had to turn them in to the ATF or destroy them without compensation, although some states did offer money for the devices.
Four cases attacking the bump stock rule were filed. The government won cases in the Circuit Court for DC and the Tenth Circuit Court. There was an 8-8 tie in the Sixth Circuit. Because of the tie, the District Judge’s ruling stood. The District Judge sided with the government’s arguments.
There was a different result in Texas. With the help of the New Civil Liberties Alliance (NCLA) and the Texas Public Policy Foundation (TPPF), Michael Cargill successfully sued Garland accusing the government of violating the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). The Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals en banc (full bench) ruled 13-3 in favor of Cargill. The court remanded the case back to the District Court to rule in favor of Mr. Cargill and issue appropriate relief.
Even though the Circuit Court clearly instructed the District Judge to issue the appropriate relief, The judge ignored the Circuit Court’s demand and did not issue any relief and closed the case. However, some gun stores in Texas have already returned bump stocks to the shelves. Some people debated whether the government would appeal the Circuit Court’s decision. Most legal scholars believed that the DOJ would be forced to appeal, and now the DOJ says they will appeal by Thursday, April 6th, 2023.
The DOJ is also asking for a stay against the Circuit Court’s ruling until the United States Supreme Court can decide whether to grant certiorari. Most legal minds believe that the Supreme Court will take up the case to avoid having different federal rules in different parts of the country.
The decision could affect other new ATF rules regarding unfinished frames and pistol stabilizing devices. Mr. Cargill spoke with this writer on a live stream about his hopes for the case. He states he hopes SCOTUS knocks down all the ATF’s new rules.
“The Cargill v. Garland case will be the case that protects all Americans,” Cargill said. “This is not about bump stocks; it’s about all cases going forward. It is about the brace case. This case will be the case that protects ten to forty million Americans from becoming felons overnight.”
Although likely, there is no guarantee that SCOTUS will grant certiorari in the case. There is no guarantee that the stay will be given. There is also no timeline for the Supreme Court to take up the case.
About John Crump
John is a NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people of all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.
The largest national security threat to America comes from our government itself, and not from China, Russia, or Iran.
“The decision to change the definition of a bump stock to a machine gun came after tragic events in Las Vegas, where over 50 people were murdered at a country music festival by a deranged madman.”
Nice job parroting of the MSM line, now please show us one projectile, in a chain of custody, linked to one of Paddocks rifles. Just one. FBI false flag.
FBATFE has zero legal authority. Period. It certainly has no power to alter statute or write law, nor to ignore plain written language such as the Congressionally determined definition of machine gun, rifle, silencer, suppressor, firearm, etc, and make new definitions by pulling them out of their arse. Yet that is what they keep trying to do, to claim something is what it isn’t, and declare millions felons for their perfectly legal property and behavior.
Even if SCOTUS rules against it, the government will continue to do as it pleases.
Democrats turning citizens back into ungrateful subjects thru gun control.
I thought acting attorney general Whitaker was the one who signed the bump stock ban not Barr.
Either way it isn’t a machine gun, common sense tells us that, also I thought everything Trump did, Biden wanted to overturn.
As a former Federally Licensed Firearms Dealer and Manufacturer, I’ve owned and fired a lot of firearms. That would also include fully automatic weapons up to belt fed machine guns. What I heard and experts heard were belt fed machine guns! An AR-15 equipped with a bump stock is incapable of laying down that kind of fire!
Another thing. How did an old man remove 2 pieces of 800 lb Hurricane proof glass from those windows?!
The damned government should have no ability to appeal. Their job is to enforce the law, not influence the kaw. Like they are so fond of telling us, “you have no standing”. No dog in the hunt.
These Nazis need to be removed from the government and the country
Please excuse me, but isn’t this here one of those “Grey Poupon” moments, where we are asking questions that have obvious answers to them?? This question being, “Is this the same USSC/SCOTUS that admitted in 2022, to making the egregious mistake in Roe v. Wade way back in 1973, which they then let stand for 49 YEARS?? THAT USSC/SCOTUS?? Of course the “court” is not populated by, composed of the same people today as it was back then, but yet the idea remains the same, that the USSC/SCOTUS is supposed to being made up of people who are smarter than… Read more »