This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.
Subscribe to the Daily Journal for access to Daily Appellate Reports, Verdicts, Judicial Profiles and more...

U.S. Supreme Court

Jun. 20, 2024

The tossing of the bump stock ban

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a bump stock modification of a semi-automatic rifle did not convert it to an illegal machinegun, and that the ATF exceeded its statutory authority under Section 5845 (b).

Philip M. Howe

Howe is a member of the California and Massachusetts State Bars, having last practiced in California in 2019.

Shutterstock

On June 14, the U.S. Supreme Court in a 6-3 decision written by Justice Thomas ruled that a bump stock modification of a semi-automatic rifle did not convert it to an illegal machinegun. [Page 1.] Garland et al. v. Cargill, 602 U.S. ____ (2024).

Machinegun

Under the National Firearms Act of 1934, a “machine gun...

To continue reading, please subscribe.
For only $95 a month (the price of 2 article purchases)
Receive unlimited article access and full access to our archives,
Daily Appellate Report, award winning columns, and our
Verdicts and Settlements.
Or
$795 for an entire year!

Or access this article for $45
(Purchase provides 7-day access to this article. Printing, posting or downloading is not allowed.)

Already a subscriber?