WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

520

The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a challenge to the Trump administration's ban on bump stock's earlier this year, but now it's putting the Biden administration's regulations on unfinished frames and receivers under the microscope. The Court announced on Monday morning that it will hear Vanderstok v. Garland in the fall term, granting the government's request for certiorari after the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a district court decision in favor of the plaintiffs.

Judge Reed O’Connor, of the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Texas, sided with the challengers and struck down the regulation in July, saying that “a weapon parts kit is not a firearm” and “that which may become or may be converted to a functional receiver is not itself a receiver.”

Judge O’Connor, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, added: “Even if it is true that such an interpretation creates loopholes that as a policy matter should be avoided, it is not the role of the judiciary to correct them. That is up to Congress.

> The Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a challenge to the Trump administration's ban on bump stock's earlier this year, but now it's putting the Biden administration's regulations on unfinished frames and receivers under the microscope. The Court announced on Monday morning that it will hear Vanderstok v. Garland in the fall term, granting the government's request for certiorari after the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a district court decision in favor of the plaintiffs. >> Judge Reed O’Connor, of the Federal District Court for the Northern District of Texas, sided with the challengers and struck down the regulation in July, saying that “a weapon parts kit is not a firearm” and “that which may become or may be converted to a functional receiver is not itself a receiver.” >> Judge O’Connor, who was appointed by President George W. Bush, added: “Even if it is true that such an interpretation creates loopholes that as a policy matter should be avoided, it is not the role of the judiciary to correct them. That is up to Congress.

(post is archived)