The recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling overturning the ban on bump-fire stocks has forced Congress to take action. The late Sen. Dianne Feinstein had warned against asking the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives to act unilaterally in 2017, emphasizing that it is the responsibility of Congress to amend laws when needed.
When the Supreme Court struck down the ban on bump stocks, reactions from prominent Democrats ranged from disappointment to outrage, with some mischaracterizing the nature of the ruling. Justice Sonia Sotomayor expressed disbelief that a 1986 law outlawing machine guns didn’t directly apply to bump stocks, despite the ATF previously determining them legal.
Sotomayor’s misunderstanding of bump stocks and automatic firearms led to her objection in the dissent. She misidentified how such devices alter the function of a firearm, claiming they fire automatically more than one shot with a single trigger function, which is not the case.
While many argue that rapid-fire devices like bump stocks should be regulated like automatic weapons, law enforcement agencies cannot unilaterally alter legal definitions. Justice Samuel Alito emphasized that only Congress can amend laws in such a manner. Rep. Dina Titus has repeatedly introduced legislation to codify a bump stock ban into law, anticipating the court’s ruling.
The frustration over the policy implications of the court’s decision is understandable for Democrats like Titus. However, the concern over the executive branch assuming the powers of Congress is ironic given the overall concern over Trump’s disregard for democratic norms. The court’s ruling indicates a commitment to maintaining a separation of powers between the White House and Congress.
Presidents have historically sought to consolidate powers traditionally held by the legislative branch, and the recent rulings are a positive development in maintaining a balance of power. This is crucial for limiting authoritarian impulses within the executive branch. The court’s commitment to upholding democratic norms should be welcomed by all, regardless of individual policy preferences.
Michael Schaus, a communications and branding expert based in Las Vegas, Nevada, and founder of Schaus Creative LLC, highlights the importance of the court’s ruling in preserving the separation of powers. He has extensive experience in public affairs commentary and emphasizes the significance of maintaining checks and balances within the government.
