WASHINGTON (CN) — The Supreme Court will again allow the Biden administration to enforce regulations on ghost guns, agreeing on Friday to block a lower court pause on the rules.
This issue was previously before the justices in August when a 5-4 split on the high court allowed the government’s rules on ghost guns to remain in place while an appeal proceeded in the Fifth Circuit. Justice Samuel Alito granted a temporary stay prior to the court’s order to allow the justices to review the case.
Now the Bush appointee has repeated the process, granting another temporary stay while the court reviews a another court ruling blocking the regulations. The pause will remain in place until Oct. 16.
The present controversy started only a day after the high court granted its prior stay in the case. A private defense contractor and gun manufacturer returned to the lower court to ask for an injunction of the government’s ghost gun rules.
Ghost guns are weapons that are sold in pieces over the internet. The do-it-yourself model gives gun access to virtually anyone with a credit card and the ability to follow simple assembly instructions. Because they are sold in part kits, the weapons also do not have serial numbers, making them almost impossible for law enforcement to trace.
To combat this problem, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives updated its definition of firearms to be able to better regulate ghost guns. Part kits are considered firearms under the new rules, which not only forces companies to obtain a federal firearm license to sell them but also requires the kits to have serial numbers.
Gun manufacturers were quick to challenge the new rules, arguing the expanded definition went beyond the understanding of the term. They also claimed the agency exceeded its authority in redefining firearms.
The advocacy groups and manufacturers who brought the initial challenge urged the court to block the rule’s enforcement because it would cause them irreparable harm. Defense Distributed and Blackhawk relied on these same arguments when returning to the trial court following the justices’ order.
Despite the high court’s order, the trial court granted the gunmakers relief, pausing the rules. The court claimed to have “ancillary enforcement jurisdiction” to grant the injunction. The Fifth Circuit narrowed the injunction but upheld the pause on the manufacturers before the court.
This forced the government to return to the justices for additional relief.
“The district court and the Fifth Circuit have effectively countermanded this court’s authoritative determination about the status quo that should prevail during appellate proceedings in this case,” U.S. Solicitor General Elizabeth Prelogar wrote. “In so doing, the lower courts openly relied on arguments that this court had necessarily rejected to grant relief that this court had withheld. The court should not tolerate that affront to basic principles of vertical stare decisis.”
The government says it presents the court with a rare opportunity to do again what it has already done before.
“This court’s answer should be the same as it was two months ago,” Prelogar wrote.
Prelogar also stages the application as an opportunity for the justices to reassert their authority over the lower courts.
“The court should not tolerate such circumvention of its orders,” Prelogar wrote.
Alito requested a response from the gun manufacturers by Oct. 11.
Follow @KelseyReichmann
Subscribe to Closing Arguments
Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.
Additional Reads
-
Newsom’s ‘May revise’ trims budget to $288 billion May 10, 2024 -
