The Trump campaign responded to the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn the Trump-era ban on bump stocks, with Trump campaign national press secretary Karoline Leavitt stating that the decision should be respected.
Leavitt emphasized Trump’s commitment to defending Second Amendment rights and criticized Joe Biden’s stance on gun control, highlighting the importance of the right to bear arms in the face of rising crime and border security issues. Trump, endorsed by the NRA, is portrayed as a staunch protector of these rights.
The Supreme Court’s 6-3 decision ruled that a bump stock does not convert a firearm into a machine gun and that the ATF overstepped its authority in issuing the ban.
A bump stock allows a semi-automatic weapon to fire more rapidly by harnessing recoil energy, but the court found it does not meet the statutory definition of a machine gun, which requires a weapon to fire automatically by a single trigger function. Justice Clarence Thomas, writing for the majority, reinforced this interpretation.
The ruling came in response to an ATF regulation issued after the 2017 Las Vegas mass shooting, which used bump stocks and resulted in significant casualties. The ATF’s rule classified bump stocks as machine guns under political pressure to enhance firearm regulations. Despite initiating the bump stock ban, the Trump administration’s action was defended by the Biden Justice Department in court.
In a dissenting opinion, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, joined by Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson, argued that the majority’s decision disregards the clear definition of a machine gun provided by Congress.
Sotomayor used a metaphor to illustrate her point, asserting that a bump-stock-equipped semi-automatic rifle functions as a machine gun because it can fire multiple shots automatically without manual reloading.
Michael Cargill, who challenged the ATF’s rule, celebrated the decision as a defense of the Constitution. Trump, speaking at the NRA’s Annual Meeting, called on gun owners to vote, criticizing them for their low voter turnout.
He expressed confidence that if gun owners voted in larger numbers, they could achieve unprecedented electoral success, framing their lack of participation as a form of rebellion that needs to be redirected towards voting.