Oregon Ghost Gun Ban Hits the Supreme Court

Oregon Ghost Gun Ban Hits the Supreme Court on Tuesday. America is at a crossroads over gun regulations and constitutional rights. The debate has reached the Supreme Court for Tuesday. Many Americans see this as an essential question about Second Amendment rights and the federal government’s authority to regulate firearms.

This new law only harasses hobbyists and will not improve public safety,” the NRA Institute for Legislative Action declared. Those groups argue in Oregon that the bans on homemade firearms violate constitutional rights. This law is against the age-old tradition of making guns at home. Obtaining serial numbers for ghost firearms is often impractical.

Eric Tirshwell, Director of Everytown For Gun Safety Law, said the do-it-yourself gun kits have gained favor in the past several years. “These DIY guns, build-at-home gun kits, really exploded in the last several years,” he said. The legal question now is whether the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives has the authority. Has the ATF exceeded its jurisdiction?

Legal experts are keeping a close eye on it. Deepak Gupta, a Supreme Court litigator and a Harvard Law professor, explained, in the case of the Court upending the rule of the ATF, federal oversight of firearms will be significantly weakened. “There’s a real risk that criminals will be able to order guns on the internet, and the entire gun control framework will not apply to them,” he said.

In June 2023, US District Judge Reed O’Connor ruled for the challengers, blocking the ATF from enforcing its ghost gun regulations nationwide. However, the Supreme Court allowed the Biden administration to enforce the rule while the case is on appeal with a narrow 5-4 vote. Justices Clarence Thomas, Samuel Alito, Neil Gorsuch and Brett Kavanaugh signaled they would have granted a stay of the rule.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit largely upheld O’Connor’s ruling, and the Biden administration appealed to the Supreme Court. The question the Court will decide is whether ghost gun parts and kits fall under the statutory meaning of “firearms” under the Gun Control Act of 1968.

Of these, one of the most critical cases to be taken up is Garland v. VanDerStok. This case has the potential to punch a gaping hole in federal gun laws. The case zeros in on the regulation of ghost guns and for individuals assembling firearms. Opponents of the ATF regulation say the federal government has never required a license to build guns for personal use.

With an increasingly conservative supermajority in the Supreme Court, analysts such as Michael Ulrich predict that arguments will go in favor of gun rights advocates. “In general, they’ve been very supportive of gun rights broadly. It would be surprising if the court, which has consistently ruled against agencies and agency regulations decided that a gun-related case was the one in which they said, ‘OK, we’re willing to accept this, ‘” Ulrich said.

This case, as it develops, has the potential to impact the future of gun control and regulation in the United States. The nature of this decision will be closely watched, both by proponents of gun regulation and opponents alike. This tends to establish an important precedent into how ghost guns and larger issues about firearms would be approached in the future.