Opinion | The author's opinion does not necessarily reflect Sarah Palin's view.
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that a federal ban on bump stocks, implemented after a deadly shooting, infringes on gun rights.
The decision challenges state-level bans on the device, which increases a firearm’s firing rate.
Justices argued that a bump stock does not turn a semiautomatic rifle into a machine gun.
“A bump stock does not convert a semiautomatic rifle into a machine gun any more than a shooter with a lightning-fast trigger finger does,” Justice Clarence Thomas wrote. “Even with a bump stock, a semiautomatic rifle will fire only one shot for every ‘function of the trigger.’”
Gun rights advocates had disputed the impact of bump stocks in mass shootings, but increased scrutiny led to federal action.
The case was initiated by a gun store owner, highlighting the Second Amendment’s discussion under a conservative-leaning Supreme Court.
The ruling contrasts with a recent unanimous decision rejecting pro-life activists’ challenge to an FDA abortion drug regulation, showing varied judicial stances.
“Under Article III of the Constitution, a plaintiff’s desire to make a drug less available for others does not establish standing to sue. Nor do the plaintiffs’ other standing theories suffice,” Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote.
“The plaintiffs have sincere legal, moral, ideological, and policy objections to elective abortion and to FDA’s relaxed regulation of mifepristone,” he said. “But under Article III of the Constitution, those kinds of objections alone do not establish a justiciable case or controversy in federal court.”
