The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) issued a slew of new and proposed rules today. One of these is the rule titled “Revising Machine Gun Definition in Response to Supreme Court Decision” (FR Document: 2026-08926). The rule is scheduled for publication in the Federal Register on May 6, 2026, and becomes effective on that date.
The rule responds to the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 14, 2024, decision in Garland v. Cargill. The Supreme Court ruled that the ATF exceeded its authority with the 2018 final rule (“Bump-Stock-Type Devices”), which had classified bump-stock-type devices as “machine guns.” The Court held that a semi-automatic rifle equipped with a (non-mechanical) bump stock does not fire more than one shot “by a single function of the trigger” or “automatically,” as required by the statutory definition in the National Firearms Act (NFA, 26 U.S.C. § 5845(b)) and the Gun Control Act.
The new rule removes the two sentences added by the 2018 bump stock rule. This change is the direct result of the Supreme Court’s Cargill ruling.
The removed sentences are:
“For purposes of this definition, the term ‘automatically’ as it modifies ‘shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot,’ means functioning as the result of a self-acting or self-regulating mechanism that allows the firing of multiple rounds through a single function of the trigger; and ‘single function of the trigger’ means a single pull of the trigger and analogous motions.”
“The term ‘machinegun’ [or ‘machine gun’] includes a bump-stock-type device, i.e., a device that allows a semi-automatic firearm to shoot more than one shot with a single pull of the trigger by harnessing the recoil energy of the semi-automatic firearm to which it is affixed so that the trigger resets and continues firing without additional physical manipulation of the trigger by the shooter.”
Although bump stocks have been removed from the definition, many are concerned that not all problematic language was eliminated. The pre-2018 definition described a machine gun as “a firearm originally designed to fire, or capable of being fired fully automatically by a single pull of the trigger.” That language was altered in the 2018 bump stock rule. Many had hoped the new rule would simply revert to the original pre-2018 text, but it did not. Instead, the revised definition still expands the meaning of a “machine gun” beyond the pre-2018 version.
The new definition reads:
“A ‘machinegun,’ ‘machine pistol,’ ‘submachinegun,’ or ‘automatic rifle’ is a firearm which shoots, is designed to shoot, or can be readily restored to shoot, automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. The term shall also include the frame or receiver of any such weapon, any part designed and intended solely and exclusively, or combination of parts designed and intended, for use in converting a weapon into a machinegun, and any combination of parts from which a machinegun can be assembled if such parts are in the possession or under the control of a person.”
While this wording may seem trivial under the current ATF, future administrations could use the expanded definition to target items such as parts kits. Additionally, the rule’s deliberate failure to distinguish between non-mechanical and mechanical bump stocks leaves a gray area, preserving room for future case-by-case enforcement actions against other devices.
A future ATF could reinterpret what constitutes a machine gun without needing new legislation or even a new rulemaking.
We have already seen the Biden administration weaponize the ATF against lawful gun owners, and the vague wording in this rule could reopen that door for future administrations, particularly regarding items like forced reset triggers (FRTs).
ATF’s 34-Rule Reform Package Is a Start, Not a Finish Line for Gun Owners
About John Crump
Mr. Crump is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people from all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons. Follow him on X at @right2bear or at www.crumpy.com.
There’s a simple fix to this and that’s to repeal the NFA/GCA/etc. and then abolish the ATF!!
“Single function of the trigger” is still better than “single pull of the trigger.” That leaves binary, FRT and release triggers out of the definition, hopefully Super Safeties too. Though the next two years might be the best time to discreetly stock up on the latter.
Someone doesn’t want to admit he was wrong so they won’t fix it.
As I understand it, the ATF is not a separate branch of government and does not have elected officials. Only congress can make laws and establish changes in laws. The ATF can only make suggestions and even their “rules” won;t hold muster unless they are presented to congress and made into law. The new ATF leaders need to get on board with the law and do what is right. They need to do it while we have control of congress, the senate and the presidency. I also think that any changes they make have to be given to the public… Read more »
They need to get rid of the NFA so I can finally build my parts kits without having to maim & cripple ’em!
I am sick of the whole issue of the ATF and all of its tyrannical edicts. Every day feels like we live under threat by ATF. If I were to unass every gun, and go back to a louisville slugger, a Bowie knife, or a wrist rocket, would they leave me the phuc alone? Furthermore, their 34 new edicts do not impress; thanks a lot DJT, you ungrateful clockshucker.
The NFA is an unconstitutional infringement, and the Hughes amendment wasn’t even passed properly, not that it matters, as it hold no lawful restriction over anyone. We are entitled to buy or build any bearable arm we deem appropriate to defend life, liberty and property, and oppose tyranny.